This article was last modified on May 9, 2006.

Debunking Myths Surrounding Charles Manson

Myth: Charles Manson is a serial killer.

Whenever the discussion of serial killers arises (and this morbid discussion arises more often than one might think), the name of Charles Manson is often invoked. Along with the Son of Sam and Jack the Ripper, he is known in the public’s mind as one of the worst serial killers ever. The only problem is that Manson is not a serial killer at all. In fact, he never killed anyone as far as anybody has been able to prove. While he may have ordered the deaths of multiple people, this does not mean he killed them and his right to be a “serial killer” is nullified by this simple fact.

The closest Manson came to killing anyone, as far as we know, is slicing the ear off of a man named Gary Hinman with a sword. While this was undeniably a violent act, the crime here certainly isn’t murder.

For more on what defines a serial killer, please see my educational piece that explains the differences between serial killers, mass murderers, and other similar categories.

Myth: Charles Manson is “the most dangerous man in America.”

While Manson has been labeled as the most dangerous man in America, this is not true now, nor has it ever been true.

Currently, we can hardly call him dangerous as he is a senior citizen in a prison cell. The chances of him hurting another human being are quite simply slim to none. Even former guards (see the book “Taming the Beast”) have found him to make a better friend than an enemy.

If we add up all the criminal acts in his life, and even give him full credit for the murders he is connected with, he is still hardly the most dangerous man in America. Nine people were killed (with a few others hinted at from prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi but never proven). Nine people.

I will not deny that nine is a significant amount of people and a heinous crime. But we are discussing THE most dangerous man in America, not just any dangerous man. Serial killers, mass murderers and the like have been known to far exceed nine people on their body counts. Twelve or thirteen people is not uncommon. John Wayne Gacy molested and murdered thirty-three young boys. Even more recently, the Green River Killer silenced and snuffed the lives of forty-nine women. For those keeping score, that is over five times the number of murders credited (falsely) to Manson.

So what makes Manson the most dangerous man in the eyes of the public and media? The fact these nine people were an actress, a coffee heiress, a celebrity hairstylist, and their friends. In the eyes of our society, the lives of the rich and famous have more value than the lives of innocent children – and especially more value than the lives of prostitutes. West Coast clout trumps suburban mediocrity, and somehow this arbitrary value system gets transfigured into an equation of how “dangerous” someone is.

Myth: Charles Manson is crazy.

Deciding on whether or not Charles Manson is crazy depends on your definition of crazy. If we mean that he suffers a sort of mental illness, most psychologists would agree with that statement. However, that definition of “crazy” is rather broad and could also include attention-deficit children, people with depression, or any other form of mental illness currently plaguing this country. If we equate craziness with mental illness, we would have to conclude that the vast majority of this country is crazy (some people would support this view, actually).

Perhaps we define crazy as being unaware of reality or of one’s surroundings. Popular culture portrays Manson as a raving lunatic who is trapped in the sixties and jumps around maniacally (as evidenced from a particular sketch comedy show). But this caricature is nothing like the real man. Manson has never had a problem functioning in the real world. He was never committed to an insane asylum, he spent no time in homeless shelters, and he took part in the “normal” activities of life such as marriage and other institutions.

People we generally imagine as being crazy have no clear understanding of right and wrong. Manson does not have this deficiency. He clearly understands right and wrong, he simply ceases to care on certain occasions. This mentality is one aspect of the illness he is most commonly believed to have, anti-social personality disorder. APD is the clinical term for what we would have formerly called a “sociopath” or a “psychopath” – though these terms are now outdated and considered derogatory.

For more on anti-social personality disorder, see my educational piece on the topic.

Myth: Manson’s Crime Should Be Punishable By Death.

When we use words like “should” we are entering into the world of opinions, and with opinions the division lines of myth and reality disappear. But this issue is a valid point to argue regardless, as it really reflects on the core of the case.

When Manson was originally sentenced in 1971, he was condemned to death. This death sentence was later overturned when there was a brief period of moratorium on capital punishment. When the death penalty was reinstated, Manson remained imprisoned for life. But there seems to be little reason he should have been on Death Row in the first place.

The only people on Death Row are murderers. Not even serial rapists can be executed under any circumstances in any state. Manson, as stated above, never killed anyone (or raped anyone, for that matter). So what justification is there to condemn him? Under California law, the “conspiracy” to commit murder makes you as guilty of murder as the actual killer.

I will not deny that a man who hires a hitman to kill his wife is guilty of a serious offense. But is it murder? We must keep in mind that everyone has the ability to make their own choices. A hitman does not have to kill anyone – he chooses to. Likewise, the killers in the Manson case had the choice of doing what they did or not. Manson’s request did not cause the deaths of anyone. He was not even there, which clearly shows that he couldn’t have forced them to go against their own wills with threats.

In short, what we have is a man who was condemned to death for asking free-willed individuals to murder, without any form of compensation, and without the asker actually even taking part in any killing. In my mind, this seems a bit of overkill when we compare it to any number of offenses that have not resulted in an order of execution.

More myths will be debunked as they are brought to the author’s attention.

Also try another article under Historical / Biographical
or another one of the writings of Gavin.

74 Responses to “Debunking Myths Surrounding Charles Manson”

  1. Paul Says:

    Hear hear! Good post. Have you heard any of Charles Manson’s music? He was a brilliant singer/songwriter. So talented it kinda makes you fall in love with him. Oh yeah, and Marilyn Manson and the Spooky Kids’ song “My Monkey” is pretty much Charles Manson’s song. You probably knew that :) Cheers!

  2. Phoebe Says:

    Hey, I like your post. It’s really good, and informative. Charles Manson was rather genious in my opinion.

  3. Josh Says:

    You are obviously not the most educated of men on CHarles Manson. Have you not read Helter Skelter or any statements from his “family”? The man thought he was Jesus Christ, and was convinced that a revolution was going to occur in California between black and white people. I understand your argument of the term crazy, but if your best friend told you to hide in the desert with him to avoid the war between the black and white people, wouldn’t you consider him crazy?

  4. gavin Says:

    Josh, my background with Manson is thorough. I have studied him for 11 years and have been pen pals for 4 years with his cellmate, James Mar. I have in my collection eight books on Manson, and two CDs.

    The reason you feel the way you do is because you read “Helter Skelter”, which is a good book but a large chunk of it is completely made up. Much of the epilogue where other killings are listed is pure sensationalism.

    I can’t really comment on the “Jesus Christ” issue, that is highly debatable. As for helter skelter being a race war, yeah you can make that claim and the claim the dune buggies were to ride into the desert to hide in the bottomless pit. I would recommend you check out John Gilmore’s “The Garbage People”. “The Family” is also decent if you get the unedited copies. And the documentary “Manson” is good, showing you what life on the ranch was like before the police.

  5. Josh Says:

    Me again just wanted to say thanks for replying and I was unaware that Helter Skelter was not 100% factual.I have also read Manson in His Own Words, Taming the Beast, and The Shadow Over Santa Susana.Do you know if any of these works are not all factual, or is there perhaps no book out on Manson that is 100% factual. Please reply

  6. gavin Says:

    Josh, “Helter Skelter” is factual to a point. As I said, it was written by the prosecuting attorney, so he went out of his way to present as much negative information as he could and some of it is just his opinion. “Manson in His Own Words” I’m unsure about. Manson himself has claimed it’s not accurate, but I’ve read it and it seemed to be decent. (Obviously he knows more about himself than anyone else does, but the photos in the book definitely suggest he had many conversations with the author). I really enjoyed “Taming the Beast”, and I have no reason to doubt anything in that book. I liked it because I found it to be the most “human” version of Manson’s story. He did horrible things, but he was not a “monster”, after all. I do not own the Shadow over Santa Susana… that is the Adam Parfrey book? Without reading it I couldn’t say anything for sure, but Parfrey does have a strong tendency to promote conspiracy theories, so if anything sounds questionable, it probably is.

  7. Josh Says:

    I must apologize to you for my first rude message. I didn’t look at your web page and see the extent of your writings. I am quite intriqued by all of your essays, which are knowledgable and thought provoking. If you don’t mind me asking, what did you major in college? I am currently a history major at Wabash College.

  8. Josh Says:

    Also I am trying to find a thorough medical analasis of Charles Manson on the internet. If you have any information on that it would be very helpful.

  9. gavin Says:

    Josh, philosophy. And thank you. I don’t mind messages of any sort (I don’t censor), but I appreciate your kind words.

    As for the medical information, I do not know of any that is public (though possibly some is in the public record as part of his trial). As you know from reading “Taming the Beast”, he has quite a record of behavioral problems and has visited the psychologist numerous times. Once he dies, these prison records will become public and I have no doubt many authors and journalists will take advantage of this.

  10. shan Says:

    ARE YOU FREAKIN CRAZY??!! i cant fathom how crazy you sound by stating that charles manson is not one of the most dangerous people in America. So maybe he didnt directly kill anyone directly but he organized every single murder that took place. He has the power to brainwash people and have them commit hanis crimes which, in my opinion, is worse than killing people himself. Would you honestly like him roaming the streets of our country with the potential to do it all over again?.. I do admit, he is a fascinating person, but not to the point in which one should defend him…

  11. gavin Says:

    I am sorry if I sound crazy, but Charles Manson is not dangerous and never was. Certainly not one of the most dangerous men in America, not even in the top 50%.

    He does not have the power to brainwash anyone and never did. I do urge you to check out some biographies of him — any biography besides “Helter Skelter”, which is almost entirely fictional. His only power was to give homeless kids drugs in exchange for them doing questionable things. Anyone can do this; it’s hardly brainwashing.

    Were Manson loose today, he wouldn’t be a threat to anyone but himself.

  12. Jane De La Boom Says:

    Right on, brother. Thanks for clarifying all of these misconceptions. Easy to read, yet extremely informative and thought-provoking.


  13. judi gold Says:

    Charlie never killed anyone. Anybody that has ever taken LSD (and, for the record, I tripped 11 times, supposedly if you trip 10 times you are leagally insane, I wanted to be sure) anyone who has tripped knows that LSD does not make you a murderer. Sadie, Lulu, Kate and Tex did what theydid because it was in their hearts. It had nothing to do with Charlie. Anyone reading this, stop, and ask yourself, if I told you to go next door, and kill everyone in the house, and leave a sign…..would you do it??

  14. gina Says:

    After viewing the parole hearings, and working in mental health for over 15 years I can sum it up in a few short words…
    really bad drugs

  15. Nichole Says:

    You said that Charlie wasn’t a murderer or a rapist, but I have done some research and found that he had raped a boy when he was 18 while holding a razor to the boys throat. Any clue as to if this is true or not?

  16. ashley Says:

    this is a good site for the debate on wether or not the man is crazy, but its clear as day the he is deeply disturbed and has serious mental issues. he shouldent be punished for the crimes that his followers commited in his name, its a persons own decision to take anothers life… he just gave them the idea and they went with it cause they belived in manson and what he thought to be right. to get into the mind of this man you’d have to no whats happend to him as a young boy, not having his father around and having a drunken neglectful BITCH for a mother whos not takeing care of you and giving you the love a mother should made it hard on him, he had to find for himself and its kathleens fault he turned out the way he did. the family was all about togetherness, like a family should be, but mansons deeply disturbed mind set in and he changed everyone else into being and doing what he wanted. hw saw him self as a godly being as did his followers. Charles Manson was and still is an amazing man and if you think hes crazy then your way at looking and the world is fucked up cause this man was a genius!!!! hate me and what i think all you want but i love him and belive in what he did.

  17. Dave Says:

    Hello, Gavin, judging by your banner we’re about the same age, (if that picture is current of course).
    I’ve recently began to unravel the mystery that is Charles Manson. Gavin, criminology intrigues me I recommend reading “Alone with the devil” by Ronald Markman, M.D. one of my favorite books. In short, he practices courtroom psychology and testified/examined not only the “family” of Manson, but also Roman Polanski.

    In reference to the previous questions above regarding to the true veracity of the testimonies, …
    I, (a writer as well), like yourselves, am at the mercy of the editor(s), as were the actual words of Manson himself that ended up being published in the aforementioned book titles. So speculation is moot.

    I after viewing many films, (interviews mainly), where Manson is interrogated, he responds to questions like, (loosely quoted, please forgive the misquotes), ” Do you see evil in you “, calmly with ” …I see everything, even the countries I have conquered ” , and taking into consideration that he wasn’t brought up in a normal fashion, I’ve come to the conclusion that Manson was “forged” out of society and that he is but a mere repercussion of what comes with “dodging one’s way through life”, from abuse, failed relationships, to a point education, as he could of made a living as a musician.

    Now much older, should be granted parole, as Gavin put it best “Were Manson loose today, he wouldn’t be a threat to anyone but himself”.

    In closing a brilliant man wasting away from his life’s plaguing, misguided footsteps, and the law that binds us.

  18. NoneYa Business Says:

    You’re fucking high. “Researched him for 11 years” my ass. Since when, since you were 4? You’re a idiot, plain and simple. Manson was, is, and will ALWAYS BE a monster, a psychotic and evil bastard. And you’re not much better for spreading this bullshit.

    I hope your mother is very proud.

  19. MarcJ Says:

    Do YOU believe that he has anti-social personality disorder? And, if so, do you believe he belongs in jail? I do believe he brainwashed those individuals, many do not. I did not see a clear indication in your piece over whether you truly believe that or not. If he does not belong in prison, what about a mental institution?

  20. Scott Says:

    Hi. My message is for Charlie. Hi!

    Just as a message board. Hi! We love you! We are kin from Kentucky and Indiana maybe. We love you, everyone, hell, all you good people… None of us here really give a fuck as to whatever. Charlie really influenced us. His girls have threatened all our us girls. Ow!.. We’re all scary! Boo! Halloween and shit! I hope we’re all cool. So anyway, boo come next October and all. Any girls posting like you’re old-time Manson girls who are writing-threatening new girls in my school who are some how more or less attracted to you; stop trying to shut this shit down! Fuck! If some teenage girl or grrl or older wishesh to send a letter to Chuck Manson, isn’t it more or less herr fucking personal choice!? Grrr! And don’t get all old-school like a bitch just because some new-school 70’s, 80’s, 90’s 2—‘s young woman happens all younger, cuter, or blonder than…

    Anyway…. My point is to get across here more or less the fact that the Manson Era is done with more or less aside from a few side fashion moments. The race war between the blacks and the whites? Between all us Mexicans and the sorry-ass few of us who survivived the border wars between the Russians and the rest of Russia, we’re all worn oyt.

    ANyway. Sorry if I’m onto the wrong thread. My real point now. Stop berating and threatening all my girls. Please from now on. Threaten okay all you want, but don’t think I can’t maybe betrack your ass to the middle of bum-fuck Asiana, let alone California or Illinois or New England if I have to on postage or vapor-ware. We will! If you suck, we will! So, don’t suck.

    I’m not saying we don’t maybe want to talk to you, you maybe don’t try and so much talk us down because we may be some of your actual grand-children, and we’re all about 99-percent alienated. I ain’t saying shit here. What the fuck! My girlfriend mentioned the Manson Family back in the wind the other day. They’re digging for fresh bodies out on some -x-ranch of yours.

  21. matt Says:

    hello to all, ok i first just wanted to say that it’s freshing to see some of the topics discussed on formats like this one. but in reality gavin youre statements are thought provoking, but i hope that’s it, because the first time i read helter skelter i was 8 years old (that was 1984 by the way). some of you weren’t even born yet.. although the book was written by the mr. bugliosi, it was written after the trial, based on facts acquired before and during the trial. he had nothing to gain by fabricating the evidence collected, after the fact. he had already received the outcome that he wanted from the trial. i’m sorry it just doesn’t make sense to lie after the fact. next, although some have replied stating the extensive material they read about charles manson or, pen pals with a “roomy”, well i have read letters written to him from a professor of psychology at the university of north texas, and the responses from charles manson. and my personal opinion conclusion was that he is definetly not a man to be intrigued about any longer. his writtings are chargulled chaois. i had a extremely difficult time decoding the words he used as slang or language. if anything you should pity the man, i gathered from his letters that he is a prime exmple of what happens to a man that has been incarsurated as long as he has. he has no sense of reality, only of himself. which i find rather funny, because that was the same stance he took during the trial. “it’s societies fault”, and “you made him who i am”, which are quotes by charles manson during the trial. although i agree with you gavin about charles manson definetly not being the most dangerous man in america. he isn’t even the most dangerous man in his cell block! i don’t however agree with the reasons why. by the way did you hear recently that they are pulling up more bodies from “the family” ranch. not facts, but do you still think not one of those are bodies were murder by charles manson. next, one fact that you are forgetting is that the tate murders were at the old home of a mr. melcher, whom was the one that refused to help launch his “music career”. i believe in law they call that motive! the “family” would’ve never gone there muchless know about that unless charlie told them. do you really think charlie didn’t have certain indirect powers over “the family”. i’m sorry that’s just foolish. there was a study done in 1970 published in a medical journal entitled “a case study of the charles manson group marriage commune”. the word “brainwashing” is used som much because in a literal sense that what it is. charles manson was able to thrive in this type of environment, because he made himself the “alpha male” among young impersonable girls, and introduced drugs as a form of lifeline to his level of spiritualism. he made everyone believe what ever he wanted them to, not necessarily by force but by their own desire to be a part of it, and to impress him. that is where the jesus christ part comes in, he truly believed that and so did they. that is exactly what brainwashing is. next, on whether charlie is crazy or not, i agree with you it depends of your own opinion on what “crazy” is. i believe he was a subject of the era, drugs, love and war. although he did believe he was going to help bring in an apocolypse, that would end the white man, and “the family” would have to go underground to a city of gold underneath death valley, and once the war was over he would emerge as the new leader. take out the drug part, and tell me that doesn’t sound crazy?! he is a standing example of what happens to bad people when they take too many drugs. by the way i say bad man, because he started stealing cars in his early teens, in jail for car thief and burgarlary at age 19. it never stopped why he was married, twice. and to finally sum up (sorry i know this long), yes he was evil, he took advantage of people weaknesses to get exactly what he wanted out of them. do we blame suicide bombers for walking to into a grocery store and blow themselves up? no, we blame the organization who made them. although it is the tip of the sword that draws blood, it is the base of the sword that the power comes from….thanks for reading.

  22. matt Says:

    and sorry i missed spelled some of the words, it was difficult to keep my fingers with my thoughts.

  23. jenna Says:

    Not only is your paragraph scattered thoughts and mispelled words, a lot of what you said is incorrect. I’m not writing to say that I’m an expert on Charles Manson.. I only wanted to make it clear that you are obviously stating “facts” that aren’t really facts. The book “Helter Skelter” holds many facts, and also a whole bunch of ficton rolled into one. Namely, the comment you made about Sharon Tate’s house formally belonging to Terry Melcher, an infamous record producer. While that statement is correct, it is incorrect to assume that the group didn’t know that Melcher had moved. The group knew Melcher had sold the house to some movie star, which is why they decided to attack there. If I had the time, I would go back through your longgggg, drawn-out opinion and point out what is wrong and what is right. I neither have the time nor the energy. Just understand that you shouldn’t speak on something without knowing all sides of the story.


  24. Sean Says:

    Lol. Manson was deranged. He portrays delusions of grandeur, and has stated that he believes he is the human incarnation of Jesus Christ several times. He has wild delusions and is clearly psychotic.

    He deserves to rot in jail regardless of your futile arguments-conspiracy to murder to still a crime and YES, it would be very dangerous if he were released into society because brainwashed impressionable morons like you would latch onto him and bend at his will.

  25. The Framing Business » Interview Regarding Charles Manson Says:

    […] reading my thoughts concerning the myths surrounding Charles Manson, I was contacted by a student for a research paper. Her questions and my answers are below. Her […]

  26. patterson Says:

    sorr gavy pants, i dont doubt your knowlege on the subject but im gonna have to disagree with you on one statement you made

    “Certainly not one of the most dangerous men in America, not even in the top 50%.”

    if your saying that half of all the men in america are more dangerous than he ever was i must disagree. i guess i dont see him as a threat anymore but at some point he had to have been in top 50%
    oh well im sure we can argue this sometime else


    that Noneya post is fucking retarded.
    you should probably change your picture so people stop thinking your an adolescent berret wearer hah

    peace. love. the Gap

  27. Shelly C Says:

    Hello, My name is Shelly . I was just wondering if you had and medical information on Charles Manson? I am doing a case study paper on him for my Abnormal Psychology class and I can’t find any medical information on him.. If you do that would be great to know. Also I would need the source that you got this information from so I can also put that in my paper.. Thanks So much

  28. El Diente Says:

    I think he was a brilliant man!! I would like to say that he remains me of Socratis.
    not very many people truly understands where all of his way of thinking comes from and he was correct in very many accusations about our society!! although I have to say I disagree with certain things he did I must also recognize that he was and is a brilliant man and maybe we are just to ignorant to understand him

  29. C Says:

    Dear Gavin, I wish to know more and as much as possible about Charles. Have been fascinated by him since childhood. I do not find it hard to understand this unique human being and the circumstances that shaped him. I strongly believe this man has spent enough time in jail. As you say: “…he is a senior citizen in a prison cell.” Where can I find material on his “current state”. The tabloids claim that he is “one of the worlds richest prisoners”. (Well, okay…he’s still in prison. Freedom is priceless.) Are these statements accurate? What is a typical day in prison for Charles? …Thanking you for your writings.

  30. Nate Says:

    Gavin – Well I would have to agree with you on most of what you said. Buglosi is a typical prosecutor and will go to any length to get a conviction, the truth does not matter to him only “winning” the case. Also I believe Charles Manson was not this evil guru with mind control powers, more likely as his interviews and other information suggest, basically just a loser who had been institutionalized most of his life. These drugged up kids who actually carried out the murdurs were acting entirely on thier own accord. No one person has the power to force you to do something unless it is at gunpoint or similer circumstances. If what Bugliosi alleged to obtain his convictions was a legitimate strategy then “the devil told me to do it” excuse would keep most killers, rapists and child molesters out of prison. Drugs are definatly not a valid justification either, basically an extention of aforementioned excuse. (I have done my share of hallucinogens and everyone I know is alive) However as far as the murders are concerned I believe Charles Manson deserved to be held accountable in some way. He did at least suggest the murder of another human being therefore deserves to be punished accordingly as would anyone else commiting a similer offense, not put to death as Vincent Bugliosi worked so hard to try and achieve. As a side note with all the things Bugliosi implied to the jury and took no steps to prove should have resulted in a mistrial. In any other case it would have.

  31. Nate Says:

    Gavin – Well I would have to agree with you on most of what you said. Buglosi is a typical prosecutor and will go to any length to get a conviction, the truth does not matter to him only “winning” the case. Also I believe Charles Manson was not this evil guru with mind control powers, more likely as his interviews and other information suggest, basically just a loser who had been institutionalized most of his life. These drugged up kids who actually carried out the murdurs were acting entirely on thier own accord. No one person has the power to force you to do something unless it is at gunpoint or similer circumstances. If what Bugliosi alleged to obtain his convictions was a legitimate strategy then “the devil told me to do it” excuse would keep most killers, rapists and child molesters out of prison. Drugs are definatly not a valid justification either, basically an extention of aforementioned excuse. (I have done my share of hallucinogens and everyone I know is alive) However as far as the murders are concerned I believe Charles Manson deserved to be held accountable in some way. He did at least suggest the murder of another human being therefore deserves to be punished accordingly as would anyone else commiting a similer offense, not put to death as Vincent Bugliosi worked so hard to try and achieve. As a side note with all the things Bugliosi implied to the jury and took no steps to prove should have resulted in a mistrial. In any other case it would have.

  32. Nate Says:

    Gavin – Well I would have to agree with you on most of what you said. Buglosi is a typical prosecutor and will go to any length to get a conviction, the truth does not matter to him only “winning” the case. Also I believe Charles Manson was not this evil guru with mind control powers, more likely as his interviews and other information suggest, basically just a loser who had been institutionalized most of his life. These drugged up kids who actually carried out the murdurs were acting entirely on thier own accord. No one person has the power to force you to do something unless it is at gunpoint or similer circumstances. If what Bugliosi alleged to obtain his convictions was a legitimate strategy then “the devil told me to do it” excuse would keep most killers, rapists and child molesters out of prison. Drugs are definatly not a valid justification either, basically an extention of aforementioned excuse. (I have done my share of hallucinogens and everyone I know is alive) However as far as the murders are concerned I believe Charles Manson deserved to be held accountable in some way. He did at least suggest the murder of another human being therefore deserves to be punished accordingly as would anyone else commiting a similer offense, not put to death as Vincent Bugliosi worked so hard to try and achieve. As a side note with all the things Bugliosi implied to the jury and took no steps to prove should have resulted in a mistrial. In any other case it would have.

  33. Nate Says:

    Gavin – Well I would have to agree with you on most of what you said. Buglosi is a typical prosecutor and will go to any length to get a conviction, the truth does not matter to him only “winning” the case. Also I believe Charles Manson was not this evil guru with mind control powers, more likely as his interviews and other information suggest, basically just a loser who had been institutionalized most of his life. These drugged up kids who actually carried out the murdurs were acting entirely on thier own accord. No one person has the power to force you to do something unless it is at gunpoint or similer circumstances. If what Bugliosi alleged to obtain his convictions was a legitimate strategy then “the devil told me to do it” excuse would keep most killers, rapists and child molesters out of prison. Drugs are definatly not a valid justification either, basically an extention of aforementioned excuse. (I have done my share of hallucinogens and everyone I know is alive) However as far as the murders are concerned I believe Charles Manson deserved to be held accountable in some way. He did at least suggest the murder of another human being therefore deserves to be punished accordingly as would anyone else commiting a similer offense, not put to death as Vincent Bugliosi worked so hard to try and achieve. As a side note with all the things Bugliosi implied to the jury and took no steps to prove should have resulted in a mistrial. In any other case it would have.

  34. matt Says:

    Hello again,
    to jenna, I completely agree with you about my mispelled words and scattered thoughts. but that is only because it’s KIDS posting they’re opinion based so called “facts” that frustrate the hell out of me, and it’s hard to keep all my thoughts straight before i have a chance to type them. so i apologize for not being able to get my point across properly. And i’m just not sure what is debateable about actual “documented” case studies, and “professor of psychology at the university of north texas?” I still have the letters from Charles Manson somewhere in my house, if i can find them i’ll post them for you. and if you can make sense of his “words” you are undisputely more intelligent than i am. and i’ll be happy to admit it to you. also, the only point you disputed in my post about true facts about the case was the melcher/tate home connection. who are you to assume the family knew that melcher had moved. there is NO documentation ever stating that the family knew melcher moved, and who leaved there after. so maybe you should practice your own preaching about not stating facts are are not true! My “facts” are verifiable. Don’t dispute my “facts” because i checked. check for yourself. Then to all of those KIDS who read a couple of opinon based books about charles manson then dub him a “genious” or “brillant”. well, you are complete idiots and are completely hopeless, and should probably just stay in the little cave you have surrounding you. because you’ll find that your thoughts on this subject, are immature and irrational, and people more intelligent and mature than you have completely different and more rational. to el diente, you really can’t compare your society to what his society was. ask your parents about if society is the same as it was in the late war torn 60’s. that’s a completely foolish agruement, nothing is the same as it was back then. and to the person who asked what charles manson’s financial status is currently in prison. well federal law prohibits a prisoner from profitting from their crimes. now, charles has been caught on several occasions trying to profit from his incarceration, ie- autographing pictures and selling them, clothes, or sold his horrible so called songs, poetry, etc. and has had all his earnings taken, and that’s also why his incarceration time is continually “extended”. that was one of the things he wrote about in one of the letters, that i have, which was following one of the interviews the professor at the university of north texas was involved with. i hope that answers your question.

  35. Nate Says:

    I apoligize for the 4 posts not trying to spam anyone. Everything is sneaky up around… sneakyville.

  36. C Says:

    Dear Matt, thank you for setting things straight re: the Charles – profit – prison thing.
    I enjoy reading your arguments on charles being dubbed “genius” and/ “brilliant. I still feel he is unique and interesting. Suppose most of us are drawn towards the macabre and often secretly “admires” an individual who dared to cross so many boundaries. There is a dark often insane side to most of us. We control our demeanor in potential explosive situations (think of something that truly infuriates you!), for fear of prosecution and the repercussions impulsive acts may have on family/friends/ourselves down the line. Tell us more.

  37. X Says:

    Hey Gavin,
    This is a great site you have! Many people are afraid to debunk all the myths about Charlie for some unknown reason. They would rather talk trash about him to make themselves feel more important or superior. Of course, the Manson haters pretty much see what they want to see regardless of what the rest of us think. He unfortunately will always be a monster, a psycho, or whatever else the haters wish to call him. Personally, I don’t believe he orchestrated or planned the murders. I’m probably going to get jumped on for saying this but it’s nothing new anyway. I’m used to it.

  38. Brenda Says:

    Thank you so much for your site. I have said for years that Manson is not a serial killer and should not be included in all the serial killer books and DVDs. He’s a cult leader and a criminal, but not a killer. He was only convicted of the “Manson family murders” because the state he was tried in allows that. He caused the murders, conspired to commit them, and shared in the guilt. I’m so pleased to find out that not everyone has Manson on some kind of weird serial killer pedestal. I’m looking forward to browsing more of your web site.

  39. Brenda Says:

    Just checking in once more to note how rude and ridiculous some of those who disagree with you have been with their comments. Hope you don’t let them upset you on any level. They’re ignorant children, regardless of their age (who probably think ignorant is a synonym for rude…).

  40. X Says:

    Brenda, I must respectfully disagree with you on 1 level. It has been said that Charlie was a “cult” leader and mastermind of the murders but I honestly don’t believe that. While it’s true the man is no saint, it would take a tremendous amount of power to influence a whole group of people. I don’t believe Charlie had that power. BUGliosi tried to make it seem as if he had all these mystical powers when in fact, Charlie is just 1 man. At least we both agree that he was no killer though.

  41. matt Says:

    to X- i hate to break it to you, but bugliosi didn’t have to do anything to make charlie “appear” like anything. charlie did it all for him. the constant outbursts in court calling the judge, the prosecutors, everyone in the courtroom “sheep”, and motherf””””””,etc. Bugliosi didn’t do anything but let charlie do exactly what he knew he would do. threw out the entire trial, charlie was blaming what “he” did, and what he “is” on society. he was a product of society. society made him what he is. the society that made him what he is, is also the same society that took away the death penalty. the very year he was set to be executed. also, x, charlie did have a “power” over the “family”. example: during the trial, charlie woke up and sported his new infamous hairdo, and jail cell tattoo on his forehead. what happened the very next day- the girls all showed up with matching mr. clean dos, and matching tattoos. that is also why charlie was studied as a “cult” leader, and “the family” was a cult. we should all be used to seeing cult leaders having power over many people- ie. david koresh (if you all are not to young to remember), “the california mass suicides”. they were just one man controlling the minds of their flock. they don’t call “the manson family” the manson family, because they were all related! because they were a cult, and charlie was the leader. mass quantities of LSD and drugs, were his bible. o and may i remind you they all called him jesus! and to BRENDA- the last time i checked, accessory to commit, and conspiracy to commit murder is a crime in every state. so he would have been convicted in every state in the entire world for “the manson family” murders! o and like i said earlier, if it wasn’t for the state he was tried in, he would have been executed in 1971. so you can all thank the state california for having something to talk about. he would have been put to the pages in history, remembered only as a evil cult leader of a group of brainwashed kids, who just wanted to be a part of something. make a difference during a crazy time in our world. it’s more TRAGIC than MYTHICAL!

  42. X Says:

    Yeah yeah, I have heard all of this stuff before from others who swallowed up the media sensationalism so it’s nothing new. I realize there’s just no making sense to those who believe in the lies being fed to them and it’s a shame that so many refuse to see the flip side of the man instead of only the “Monster” that the media and BUGliosi made him out to be. Like I said before, I realize Charlie was no saint because he did make some mistakes in his life but I also think it’s wrong to lay the entire deal in HIS lap. Bottom line, those killers did what THEY wanted to do. THEY chose to kill, shave their heads, or whatever else they felt would bring them closer to Charlie. I don’t believe he ordered them to do ANYTHING and they had complete control over THEIR OWN actions. Charlie unfortunately got involved with some individuals who had murder in their veins before HE ever came onto the scene period! Another thing I want to point out is that back in the 60’s, there were a lot of communes which normally had a leader. Were they a cult too? I’m familiar with the David Koresh incident too and I don’t see any comparison between him and Charlie. Lynette Fromme (aka “Squeaky”) even stated it herself in the film “Manson” that Charlie was no “leader” as so many seem to think. Those who have claimed otherwise have only done so I believe to make a good impression in hopes they will be released someday. Of course, Atkins won’t get that opportunity because she’s dead but the rest of them will say ANYTHING to decrease their guilt by blaming Charlie entirely for what THEY did. It’s just NOT right! By the way, does it make sense to you that a man who only committed petty crimes in the past would go to such an extreme as murder? It sure doesn’t make any sense to ME whatsoever! At least Charlie has been consistent with his version of events unlike the others. By the way, THEY acted up in court too.

  43. matt Says:

    to X- well i guess if YOU don’t believe charles manson ordered any murders or committed any himself, the case should just be reopened and manson be freed immediately! this is the problem with voicing opinions, not true documented FACTS. you talk about “media sensationalism”, but yet you quote a movie? i don’t see how you can tell the obvious similiarities between koresh and manson. both had their families convinced they were the second coming of jesus christ. both groups did everything jesus wanted them to. EVERYTHING. sex, drugs, closing them off to the rest of “society”. using fear as a tool for complete and undoubting loyalty. the willingness to die for their jesus. if that’s not a cult, tell me what is. o and by the way, here is a quote from manson in open court during the trial ” you can convince anybody of anything if you just push it at them all of the time. they may not believe it 100 percent, but they will still draw opinions from it, especially if they have no other information to draw their opinions from.” he admitted to being completely aware that he was pulling all of their strings. he was the puppetmaster to all his little puppets. here is a quote from paul watkins during the trial,” i lived with charlie for one year straight and on and off for two years. i know charlie. i know him inside and out. i became charlie. everything i once was, was charlie. there was nothing left of me anymore. and all of the people in the family, there’s nothing left of them anymore, they’re all charlie too.” which you should remember, because it was in the very same movie! also, after the trial their is a documented (and witnessed) interview between bugliosi and manson, when he was on trial for the hinman-shea murders. where he is quoted as saying,” i don’t have no hard feelings.” he told bugliosi he had done “a fantastic job” in convicting him, and said, “you gave me a fair trial, like you promised.” he also said “prison has always been my home; i didn’t want to leave it last time and you’re only sending me back there.” so your bleeding heart for him is completely in vain. because seeing the flip side of the man tells me, he knew he got what he deserved. and he never wants to be released. FACTS! and i guess it probably wouldn’t make sense to you, how a “petty” crime felon, goes to murder. but that’s called murder profiling 101. most criminals start out with “petty” crimes, then progress to bigger ones. he started with beating his wife, then carjacking, and armed robbery. that is text-book progression. he had been in jail on and off since before he could drive a car. i am sorry but you’re arguements are foolish and irrational.

  44. Brenda Says:

    Sorry, X. I’ll have to return the favour and respectfully disagree with you. I’ve seen interviews with Charlie and some of his followers, and they (his girls) were undoubtedly brainwashed. I’ve worked in law enforcement for many years and have gotten pretty good at discerning when someone’s full of crap and when they’re sincere, during interviews.

    The girls were in their mid-40’s during the interviews (done separately) and both were very candid about what they’d done. They took responsibility for their share in the slayings and resented Manson for blaming them in totality. On the other hand, Charlie was in his mid-60’s during his interview and was still a babbling anti-social, who contradicted himself again and again, and was playing games with the interviewer. He denied trying to control anyone, despite his attempts to manipulate the interview itself. The guy just has zero credibility and he seems to like it that way.

    This video also interviewed Manson’s parole officer from those days, who confirmed that he was very controlling and manipulative and often brought “his girls” to his parole meetings. The mind control the parole officer witnessed was enough to concern him so I highly doubt that everyone is lying except Charlie…

    Even the crime scenes depict that “the family” was not acting out their own rage, in that some of the victims’ faces were covered with pillows after death. This indicates immediate remorse and feelings of guilt, which matches well with the frank testimony of the interviewees.

    I don’t profess to be an expert on Manson but admit that serial murder is an area of great interest for me. I have read nothing on this site that convinces me that my original opinions may be wrong.


  45. X Says:

    Matt, the only reason I quoted the “Manson” film is because it contains conflicting information about Charlie. The film basically gives you 2 sides of the story while the media generally provides only 1 side which is normally the worst. YOU have to decide for YOURSELF which side is true and I have done just that based on everything I have seen and heard so far combined with additional bits of info I received from others who know better. I came across some people online years ago who opened my eyes to the flip side of Charlie. Like you, I used to believe in all the sensationalism because it was presented in a fashion that can VERY easily reel you in. The media deliberately shows the absolute worst side of the man to get everyone to believe it so they can sell their newspapers and magazines. NOBODY could do what those killers did without having some extreme amounts of hostility in them. I doubt ANYONE could put all that rage inside of them because it takes a certain type of individual to pull off something as hideous as those murders. Charlie did say in an interview once that they probably did what they THOUGHT he wanted even though he didn’t give them specific orders. Something like that. I have several interviews done with Charlie on tape and I have some rare footage shot of him along with the others during and after the trial which provides a more realistic view because Charlie was actually allowed to speak on his own behalf unlike in the courtroom. Charlie even did an interview with Jerry Rubin in prison and he was clearly NOT the crazed lunatic that the media has portrayed him as. Yes, he’s a little screwy at times but certainly NOT quite as bad as others have made him out to be. By the way, that quote supposedly from Charlie that you claim was witnessed came right from the movie “Helter Skelter” and people who know better realize that movie is all Hollywood. Do you mind telling me who this “witness” is that supposedly overheard Charlie say those words you mentioned? Another thing, Charlie may have quoted the other thing in court but it still doesn’t mean he ordered the killings or had ANYTHING to do with what the killers had going on in their minds. They were doing drugs at the time which most likely clouded their better judgment and let to the savagery of the murders. I think Tex even indicated at some point that drugs played a significant role in what they did. I could be wrong but I did hear it somewhere. Don’t be sorry for anything either because I feel the same way about YOUR arguments as you do about MINE. It’s fine, really. Variety is the spice of life after all and I believe we can agree to disagree without any negative recourse.

  46. X Says:

    Ok Brenda, that’s YOUR opinion and of course you’re welcome to it same as others who agree with you. I’m not saying that Charlie didn’t have a controlling nature but I believe it was only to a point. I do NOT believe it escalated into murder. I base this on everything I have seen and heard from the man himself. People can say lots of things but I hold more value in what comes from the actual source. Regarding Charlie’s “babbling” as you call it, he does like to put on a show sometimes but there are moments of clarity when he’s serious and those are the times when he’s the most credible. I have a LOT of audio and video proof of this. Have you ever seen the documentary titled: “Charles Manson Superstar”? If not, I think you should definitely make a point to see it because Charlie speaks openly about a variety of issues with Nicolas Schreck. It’s a MUST see for anyone who hasn’t yet experienced the flip side of Charlie. We can agree to disagree about the subject though and it will be fine.

  47. Brenda Says:

    Thanks for the tip, X. I’ll definitely watch that documentary if I can find it.

  48. Brenda Says:

    Found this review on

    The best “review” of this film can be found on an insert dated 2002 found within the DVD casing itself: filmmaker Nikolas Schreck writes that, since having made the film in the late 1980s, “I have learned much more concerning the actual facts of the Manson murders than I knew when this film was made. In light of this more accurate information, it is obvious to me that I presented several wrong conclusions in ‘Charles Manson Superstar.’ Were I to make this film now, I would have asked Manson very different questions than I did at the time. For example, I have heard credible evidence that indicates that Manson may well have been present at the scene of the murders and may have been far more involved in the crimes themselves than even his most vociferous critics have claimed. Therefore, I no longer believe that Manson was the innocent martyr he presented himself to be.”

  49. matt Says:

    To x- the witness you asked about was the court baliff who was required to be there. Since he was still in custody and on trial for the hinman-shea murders. The contents of the interview were questioned by the judge of that trial. Since bugliosi was not the prosecutor of that trial. The judge had to verify that no details of the current trial were discussed during the interview. All of this is on court documents. No media sensationalism or holllywood involved at all. Again verifiable facts. And mine aren’t arguements. I am merely stating verifiable facts. That’s it. You can’t argue facts. Unless the court stenographer was secretly paid by buigliosi. To make the court documents say exactly what he wanted. Gpood luck with that one.

  50. X Says:

    Well Brenda, I don’t have the DVD so of course I can’t validate the accuracy of the DVD insert that you quoted from. Even if what you posted is actually in the DVD insert, who’s to say that Schreck even wrote it? In any case, his denouncement of Manson is NOT indicated in this “Wikipedia” article I found:

    While the DVD notes are mentioned, it’s not specific in what the content is. Obviously IF Schreck decided to turn his back on Charlie, it’s because he chose to believe whatever HE felt was credible regardless if the information was for REAL or NOT. I mean, people are free to change their minds after all but there is STILL additional information that I have seen to the contrary which basically exonerates Charlie. A book titled: “Crucified: The Railroading Of Charles Manson” reveals a great deal of information which was unseen until the book was released. The book unfortunately is out of print but I have a copy which I have been planning to scan and upload onto a website for others to see. In addition, I have a CD consisting of rare telephone conversations between Charlie and a trusted friend. This trusted friend is still in contact with Charlie on a regular basis. You can also feel free to check out this website dedicated to Manson truth:

    Believe it or not, there is a LOT you don’t know about this but I do. Honestly if I thought for 1 moment that Charlie was guilty of orchestrating and carrying out those horrible murders, I would NEVER speak out in support of him. I DO know otherwise which is why I’m speaking out now.

  51. X Says:

    Matt, with all due respect I don’t trust whatever that baliff said because he was working for the court at the time and it’s only natural he would side with those trying to persecute Charlie. I appreciate your input though.

  52. X Says:

    Brenda, I tried posting a reply to you but it’s on moderation due to some links I included in the original comment. I think the moderator may want to be sure the links are Ok before allowing the post to go through which is understandable. Just in case it doesn’t go through, I basically stated that the DVD insert notes may or may not be accurate. I don’t have the DVD and I only have the VHS of “Charles Manson Superstar” which doesn’t include any statements from Schreck so of course, I haven’t seen his alleged statement for myself. I did however locate an article on “Wikipedia” which mentions the DVD insert notes but it’s NOT specific about the content nor does it indicate that Schreck turned his back on Charlie. IF in fact he did, it’s obvious that he chose to go along with whatever HE felt was credible regardless of the accuracy in the information he was given or lack thereof. If you do a search, you will find that article. It’s definitely worth reading. In addition, there is a website called “Manson Direct” which is dedicated to the truth about Charlie and you could learn a great deal of information if you check it out. The website can be found by typing the name in any search engine. There’s also a book by Michael White titled: “Crucified: The Railroading Of Charles Manson” which contains material that was unseen by the public before the book’s release and I have it in my collection. Unfortunately, the book is now out of print which is why I have been planning to scan and upload the content of it into a website for anyone who hasn’t read the book to see. I have some rare phone conversations as well in my collection that took place between Charlie and a close friend who is still in contact with the man. These phone conversations are recent too. There is a LOT you obviously don’t know about Charlie and I do. Believe me, if I thought for 1 moment that Charlie orchestrated and carried out those horrible murders, I would NEVER speak out in support of him because I’m NOT a fan of murder.

  53. matt Says:

    well, with all due respect to you, if the situations were reversed; if the baliff had stated that bugliosi had lied, and manson never said the things he was QUOTED as saying. i bet you would be posting it you support your BELIEFS. this is the whole point saying how bugliosi is nothing but a liar. this is the whole point. i’m not saying beliefs or what could of happened. it’s amazing to me how you put a convicted criminal’s (even before the murder trials) credibility, above a prosecutor’s, you know, a EDUCATED man doing his actual job. it’s also amazing to me how you don’t understand the word’s become EXTREMELY apparent that if it doesn’t show manson in a positive light, in your eyes, it CAN’T BE TRUE. the baliff must of received a big fat bonus for lying on the stand and committing PURGERY! do you even look at what you type after you type it. you’re blind, foolish and immature. with all due respect.

  54. X Says:

    Matt, it’s obvious that all you can do is pass false judgments without even considering that I could be right in what I say. YOU are not even fit to judge ME because you don’t even know who I am! Now, I’m not claiming to be 100% correct on everything. I AM however stating what I believe is true same as YOU are. Of course, I do it in a more dignified fashion than YOU without all the meaningless insults. What would you do if somehow it were proven that Charlie was railroaded? Would you eat your words or continue singing BUGliosi’s praises while insisting that others are “blind”, “foolish”, and “immature” as you put it? By the way, save your weak insults for someone who gives a damn. You might want to try doing a better job of coming up with better ones too;) I left a discussion group because of being slammed for my beliefs and I really have no problem walking away from this mess with dignity. I can very easily forget that you or this forum even exists because you’re NOBODY to me anyway. Just another screen name like me. If I did walk away, you and everyone else would be reduced to complaining to each other about your “boogyman” Charlie because I wouldn’t be exposed to ANY of it. I guess I’ll just wait and see what comes out of you next. For the record, I NEVER said that BUGliosi was a complete liar nor did I intend to imply anything of the sort. I DO however feel that he embellished in a LOT of what he said about Charlie being the so-called “mastermind” behind the murders when he got on his little “Helter Skelter” trip which resulted in Charlie not getting a fair enough trial. That incident regarding Charlie supposedly making his watch stop was a real hoot also LOL:) Can you honestly say BUGliosi was being logical there? The way I see it, he blew the entire situation out of proportion so that he could win his case and justice had VERY little if ANYTHING to do with it. Since you’re so convinced that I’M wrong, why not prove it then? I can prove MY end of the facts. Can YOU? Go dig up some decent authentic facts and then we’ll talk.

  55. matt Says:

    x- true, me calling you “foolish”, “immature”, and “blind” are my personal opinions. but at least i know the difference between the two. you know FACTS and OPINIONS. everything else that i posted are true, verifiable facts. court documents, trial examinations, documented interviews, are all verifiable. they can’t be “altered” to say what we want after the fact. last time i checked court stenographers aren’t paid by the prosecutors or even by the judges. so they are there just waiting for to look at. i have posted actual quotes from people involved in the trial and manson himself. you have done nothing but repeat opinons given to you by someone else, or websites you’ve looked at. you are basing your entire arguement on movies, and books written decades after the fact. o ya and your own professional opinon on the subject. you have posted one quote by a movie director, which has since been proven wrong. nothing else but your own personal beliefs. i am sorry for the insults, but that doesn’t make you right. it makes you FOOLISH. just because you believe it so much, doesn’t mean it’s correct. that means your BLINDed by the facts. by the way if you were more familiar with the actual CASE, you would know bugliosi didn’t bring up “helter skelter”. it was susan atkins that first brought it up. bugliosi didn’t have to bring it up, “the family” did it for him. by screaming it in the court room to scare the jurors, and create a media frenzy. and no me personal, i don’t consider MURDER blowing “it out of proportion”. you forget he was convicted murder and sentenced to death. so if the state of california would not of abolished the death penalty in 1971. you would have no forums to complain on, no one to feel sorry for. and don’t flatter yourself. you don’t REALLY think i would care if you stopped posting do you. there are always more ignorant idiots like you to argue with. it was a good try though.

  56. X Says:

    You know Matt, I think you just ruined your credibility by referring to me as an “ignorant idiot” but nice try at the insults:) I’m sure you can do better than that so I’ll just wait to see if you are able to muster up something better than just mindless drivel. Making a phony apology and then repeating the same offense doesn’t increase your credibility either just so you know. By the way, my statements about Charlie are NOT 100% based on what others have told me. I heard enough from the man himself through his OWN mouth. Who’s voice do YOU speak with? In my opinion, it sounds like BUGliosi. Another thing, IF Atkins mentioned “Helter Skelter”, BUGliosi STILL ran with it regardless of who came up with the term first. I see you all of a sudden got hostile because I challenged you to prove me wrong. What’s wrong Matt? Can’t you do it without meaningless insults? Does it make you stand taller to pass false judgments on ME? I think NOT! It’s apparent you’re a Manson hater and that’s fine if you want to be that way. However, when you dish out petty little insults towards someone who challenges you, it just makes you look ridiculous and pathetic. The challenge still stands. YOU come up with some decent authentic facts to prove ME wrong. Otherwise, you’re just going to continue making a fool out of yourself. Have fun:)

  57. matt Says:

    x- let me assure you, those are not insults. i’m not passing false judgements. those are mere OBSERVATIONS. call them what you want, if the shoe fits wear it. and my credibility has never been the topic. this was an exercise and debate over a topic. which you have completely failed miserably at! you had no credibility to start with, because you NEVER, NOT ONCE, stated a single shred of proof, or “verifiable” facts that charles manson never did the things he was CONVICTED of. they have been nothing but opinions and beliefs on the subject, which gives nothing of actual what you called “authentic” facts. you should practice what you preach. also, why wouldn’t bugliosi run with it? it proves the family acted together under manson’s direction. see, this is the whole point you just REFUSE to swallow. the TRUTH. your opinions of charles manson don’t actually have anything to do with the trial at all. they come decades after the fact, and your judging him as a person, now. i could care less about how he is NOW. THE FACT IS, he was convicted of facilitating and conspiring to murder over 40 years ago. i have heard manson speak as well, and you say i was speaking “mindless drivel”. come on, give me break. i could barely understand the words coming out of his mouth. it was like i needed a special prison dictionary just to understand him. and that was definetly not hostility, but frustration towards you. from your simple REFUSAL to believe anything negative about charles manson. yes, you said he was no “saint”, but that’s a BIT of an understatement. o and i noticed that you clarified me by saying not 100%. which tells me personally, that it probably is at least 95%. well at least 5 % are your own thoughts. see there’s a positive comment for you. enjoy. by the way, my voice, is just the voice of the RATIONAL group. but allow me to clarify something to you now. i have always been intrigued by charles manson the person. not a hater, i’m a manson realist. i’m not a fan, and i’m not a hater, either. i have never thought he was “railroaded” though at the trial. i was never that illusioned by him. definetly not like you are.he did what he was convicted of, and just my OPINION, he probably did more. see that, i recognized the difference between what i was saying as fact, and opinion. he has believed a lie for so long, it’s not a lie anymore. he has blurred his own reality. and as far as me trying to prove YOU wrong, and making myself look like a fool. are you even reading the same posts as i am? i don’t have to prove you wrong. last time i checked, charles willis manson was convicted of murder, and will NEVER GET PAROLLED. you can keep crying for him, until he dies in prison. because that is what is going to happen. that’s called the ultimate “last laugh”. i win regardless. by the way, weren’t you to crying on about going to some other forum?

  58. X Says:

    Well, in order to understand Charlie, you have to be open-minded YOURSELF and I just don’t see that in you Matt. By the way, I said before that I COULD leave this board IF I wanted to. Personally, I think it’s more fun watching you make this all about YOURSELF. The “last laugh” as you call it will happen when the REAL truth is revealed and all of the Manson haters realize they have been wrong all these years. Bottom line, I know things that YOU don’t and all of this crap you spew is NOTHING NEW! I want you to present NEW facts to back up YOUR case Matt. Unless you’re willing to accept my challenge, everything you say is merely typical and routine. No matter what, you’re going to continue singing BUGliosi’s praises because your brain is in neutral. How sad that is for you Matt:( I truly feel sorry for you:( You recently made a comment about me getting my information from books and I have a question for you. Don’t YOU get YOUR information from books as well? I’m sure you have read that Hollywood horror novel of BUGliosi’s “Helter Skelter” right? I can’t imagine an individual who’s so much into BUGliosi as yourself would let that book slip by unread. There are many books on the issue which provide conflicting stories. I have been exposed to BOTH sides and made my decision based on everything I learned. YOU might want to try doing the same instead of sitting there with your biased mind fixated on your belief that Charlie is the monster that BUGliosi and others have made him out to be. Do you remember when I said before that I was once like you and I believed the sensationalism? Well, I changed my mind after hearing different. How do you know that YOUR mind won’t be changed if you gave the other side of the story half a chance. Of course, maybe that’s the whole issue with you. Maybe THAT’S the reason you don’t want to accept my challenge. You MUST have your scapegoat and “boogyman” right? God forbid if you learned something new that painted a more realistic portrait of Charlie and it was proven that he’s NOT all that you haters THINK he is! Your little world just wouldn’t be the same. So sad:(

  59. X Says:

    1 more thing Matt, I don’t consider your petty insults as mere “OBSERVATIONS” as you call it. You might want to re-evaluate YOURSELF however and see if the shoe fits YOU. My boots are the only shoes that fit ME;)

  60. matt Says:

    o x- you are completely delusional, and lost in your own little world, where nothing is real, but what you believe. x you need some much help, it’s sad really. i’m sure that’s why you have left other discussion groups. a debate isn’t a debate when your side has no TRUTH to it. like you said before, you know NOTHING about me, i never made this so called conversation about me. you are pathetic, and you need to get over yourself. their is no challenge. charlie is never getting out of prison. your so called “truth” is NEVER going to set charlie free. you act like you are so intimate with charles manson. but i love telling you this, he doesn’t know you. he doesn’t care who you are. your little “love affair”, is quite funny though. little x coming to manson’s poor little rescue. let’s all take a second to thank x for their useless crusade to save poor charles manson. now your just getting annoying! i can only hope when you get older and more mature, you will realize the lack of truth in your reasoning. but believe this truth- charles manson will die in prison. now you just need to move on, and GET OVER IT!

  61. X Says:

    LOL:) Yeah, that’s right! Keep telling yourself whatever will make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside Matt hehehe:) It’s obvious, just who the REAL delusional soul is here and it certainly is NOT ME. Whatever though, you just keep going on with YOUR delusions if that makes you comfortable. I could really care less. You’re just a total riot LOL:) What you’re clearly showing me is that you can’t carry on a decent civil debate without all the name calling. Does name calling and belittling ME make YOU stand taller in that little world of yours? If it does, then you’re much smaller than I thought you were before. How do YOU know who Charlie knows and who he cares about anyway? It sounds like you’re just blowing more hot air around. Try taking YOUR OWN advice too and GET OVER IT! Like I said before, save your lame insults for someone who gives a damn because I DON’T! Really, can’t you do any better than that? Your kind never ceases to amaze me. You spout off using BUGliosi’s mouth and are so afraid to learn something new. It looks like YOU are the 1 who is pathetic Matt. Just an observation;) Please get a new routine because this little game of yours is getting quite old. Amusing yes, but still old. While you’re at it, get some help for your ego because after all, it’s a “too much thing” like Charlie’s song says hehehe:) You are right about 1 thing though. There really is no challenge when dealing with an unarmed individual such as yourself;) Your fear overrides all reason and logic on your end. What are you winning by the way? You can’t possibly win something that is no contest. I know stuff that YOU DON’T but of course your fear is going to prevent you from acquiring that knowledge. So very sad:( Hey, there are others who posted WAY before I ever did in support of Charlie. Why don’t you come down on THEM too? Go back and read message 11, 12, and 13. Then look at YOURSELF in the mirror and repeat all of the junk you wrongly accused ME of. Maybe then, you will get a glimpse of REAL truth staring YOU right in the face;) I actually look forward to your future nonsense postings because it truly makes me feel good inside knowing I’M a much better person for being so free in the mind:)

  62. Bodie Says:

    Matt, you have a bad case of ‘Delusional’ going on, you need to seek help from the nearest shrink immediately.

    – Bodie

  63. matted dog Says:

    WOOF! WOOF! Matt needs a shrink.

  64. X Says:

    I was just sitting here pondering over some stuff and I may or may not continue on with this seemingly endless debate. I just don’t know. I guess I’ll wait and see what happens next. If I decide NOT to reply, I hope you don’t miss me much:) Thanks for the good time though;)

  65. Brenda Says:

    Probably best to call it a truce, guys…

  66. X Says:

    Yeah, you’re right Brenda. Unfortunately, I can’t do it all by myself though. It has to be a mutual effort on his part too.

  67. Brenda Says:

    It’s obvious that you’re both reasonable men – just passionate in your beliefs, which is fine. Unfortunately, wars begin over conflicting beliefs (usually religious),when the people aren’t willing to agree to disagree. Life’s too short to let an interesting debate turn into an argument so I’m glad you’re willing to let it go. I’m sure Matt will let it go, too.

    I’ll be interested to read future posts as people who are genuinely interested in this subject check in with their comments. Hopefully not just stupid one-liners, as some earlier posts have been.

    Thanks for the book tips. I’ll see what I can find around here. Stay safe out there.

  68. Moe Says:

    1) antisocial do tend to be killers, thieves con artist.
    It is a personality type – and you can
    Differentiate right from wrong
    He knew what he was doing.Thus qualify to imprisonment
    2) If u hire some1 to kill u r just as guilty.

  69. X Says:

    You are most certainly entitled to your opinion Moe and I’m entitled to disagree.

  70. Gina Says:

    I’m sorry but I have to laugh at anyone who uses “Helter Skelter” as a point of reference on Charles Manson. It’s like taking a newspaper clipping to court to prove your case. Not a very reliable witness to say the least or piece of evidence, unless we are discussing the fantasy life of Mr. Bugliosi that is.

  71. Lisa Says:

    Funny thing about your pen pal James Mar. Manson only had cellmates before his indictment for murder. Since approximately 11/69 – 12/69 Manson has never had a cellmate, to protect Manson.

  72. Says:

    What if the people who supposedly killed the victims in a cold blooded way, really were brainwashed by Charles, but only in the purpose of him to understand and to be 99.99% sure that mankind really is so easily swayable. Having this understood by himself, he’s just waiting for the rest of the world to understand that the same thing is being done to ALL OF US at every second we breathe, every thinkable way possible. You might want to think that this would be a totally cruel and evil thing to do, but you can’t forget that everything has two sides. Nothing was/is/or ever will be achieved without sacrifices, in that case the “family”. Wouldn’t it make sense, because he still is waiting for his “trial”…? Read his eyes.

  73. Lucy Says:

    If Charlie was so good at brainwashing that he managed to convince all these people to kill for him -in fact he controlled Linda’s mind in a matter of two to three weeks – does no one think the CIA would have used him as a very useful tool in their war against Russia.
    It has been admitted that for ten years the CIA ran trials on both knowing and unknowing individuals, using LSD and other drugs to try mind control. the idea being that once it was mastered they’d use it on Russian spies and send them back to kill. The whole thing failed miserably, yet Charlie did it in two weeks??? Rubbish.

  74. Reglis Says:

    He is/was never the most dangerous man in America. Why? Because anyone with rudimentary intelligence wouldn’t be stupid enough to believe the crap he spewed. My word, reading/listening to some of what he said or believed makes me wonder who is stupid enough to believe this drivel.

Leave a Reply