About book Helter Skelter: The True Story Of The Manson Murders (2001)
This book is bad. Well, not just slightly bad, but TERRIBLY bad. How anyone can believe this tripe is truly beyond all realms of imagination. Get Marlin Marynick's 'Charles Manson Now' and Schrecks new and updated 2011 book 'The Manson File: Myth and Reality of an Outlaw Shaman' from his website.This book is terribly bad. So much nonsense it's almost embarrassing. I suggest getting 'Charles Manson Now' by Marlin Marynick (read the Star review on the Amazon page for it) and Nikolas Schrecks' new and updated 2011 900 page edition 'The Manson File' which I believe is only available via his website."Helter Skelter is the most famous (or infamous) work attributed to the Manson case. Bugliosi, in his work as a prosecutor for the case, compiled his thoughts and evidence in this somewhat dubious award winner.Unfortunately, the book itself falls somewhat short of a literary masterpiece, and seems to have won most of its acclaim as a result of people's terror shortly following the case itself, and their willingness to ingest whatever was written, as soon as it was written, mirroring the media circus fiasco which the case itself spanwed.Dwelling on the somewhat unbelievable and conspiracy-driven helter skelter theory, the book, and Bugliosi himself, posits an undeniably fantastic scenario, in which a Satanic hippie with unlimited supplies of drugs, managed to convince his various young apostles to proceed with plans to begin a race war through killing. Bugliosi of course points out that Manson was trying to kill a former Beach Boy named Terry Melcher who promised him a record deal, in an attempt to get back at a system which rejected his self proclaimed musical talent.The gaping logical holes in the case force logical individuals to place Helter Skelter in the fantasy section at their library. As pointed out by the somewhat more enjoyable and well written work "The Manson File, Myth and Reality of an Outlaw Shaman" by Nikolas Schreck, Manson was aware Melcher was no longer at the murdered residence at the time, but had moved some distance away (he would have known this since several of his friends visited him often to use drugs together.) The idea of controlling people using LSD is ludicrous when one studies the actual effects of the substance, a fact the government itself understood after failed MK-ULTRA experiments attempting to use LSD as a mind control drug and truth serum.The sad fact is that this entire work is nothing more than pulp fiction spawned by the anti-drug and anti-hippie bent establishment in the late 1960s and into the early 1970s. With an obsessive, almost religious fervor, Bugliosi repeatedly returns to his race war theories, without even visiting other possibilities in the case.In fact, the entire work seems to have been written with the sole purpose of absorbing as much money as possible following the case, with a mind to sensationalize it as much as possible, so that the scope of interest would increase. It will likely appeal to people who have limited understanding of the case, and are just looking for a spooky late night insomniac's friend to help them sleep unsoundly with a heavy dose of psychopath-hippie nightmares. " This book is really one of the worst fictionalised accounts of what went on, ever! How it has become the number one book is beyond me! So outdated, so, so,... fake. I agree with the other reviewer, if you want an accurate look at the issues, the case and Manson himself, get 'Charles Manson Now' by Marlin Marynick AND definately The Manson File: Myth and Reality of an Outlaw Shaman by Nikolas Schreck. Currently, the latter book is only availabl from his website - that is the new, expanded, updated 2011 900 page edition.The Manson File, as brought to you now by Camion Noir, is much more than a revised and expanded edition of Nikolas Schreck's "The Manson File," which appeared in the late 80s. Former member of the gothic / industrial experimental combo RADIO WEREWOLF, Schreck has never ceased to try to establish the truth about the 'Manson Family', and the grotesque fraud of the trial of leading Spahn Ranch figures, conducted, it should be remembered, in the absence of Manson, whose choice to serve as his own legal representative was denied numerous times by the court ... The work accomplished by Schreck is titanic. The book's sheer number of pages might dissuade the potential reader. But no lesser length would suffice to present the complicated ins and outs of the case presented here in so logical and irrefutable a manner. And when you immerse yourself in the narration of facts, it becomes impossible to deny them. The Manson File is a spider web designed to trap any flies of lies that have gathered in the last forty years. ... Each character, each story has its own rationale, and even if we can get lost in this labyrinth of truths, and the characters' names get tangled, everything becomes clear in the end, and the puzzle is reconstructed. ... If the proponents of the hackneyed Helter Skelter theory have preferred from the outset to focus on a small group of culprits, the affair of the Tate/LaBianca killings is shown here to have involved a huge number of direct and indirect protagonists, many of whom were illustrious figures of the dying sixties scene. But the main responsibility for this hypocrisy that the American justice system has called a "trial" for four decades, is without a doubt Vincent Bugliosi, who masterfully played this parody knowing he was cast in the best role.... Throughout the book's long development, Nikolas Schreck strives to reveal every aspect of the many different stories concerning the character of Manson. Far from trying to make a martyr of him, and far from trying to present him as a saint sacrificed on the altar of dissimulation, he is content to present him just as he is, with all of his philosophies and his contradictions, as the criminal/ philosopher he has always been. The mere fact of presenting Manson's words verbatim is indicative of the author's desire for truth. As one who has communicated many times with the most famous prisoner in America , he knows who he's dealing with, and does not disguise his thoughts to give birth to an uproarious and highly praiseworthy work. After reading this book, we've encountered a Manson who is always funny, annoying, disturbing, contradictory, but above all fascinating. The man who could have been a beacon of freedom in thought and action ended up imprisoned for life because of meeting the wrong people at the wrong time. ... The Manson File is divided into several sections, distinct but complementary. It's evident that the author tried to understand all the different aspects of Manson's personality, the episodes of his life and his encounters, and to understand all the nonsense presented at his trial in the late 60s. Charlie is presented in turn as an influential musician of integrity, a shaman as defined by authentic Indian cultures, but also as a criminal who has spent more time in prison than in freedom, and never felt as safe - physically and intellectually - as in that cell. As I said previously, his trajectory is transcribed faithfully, without any attempt at "romanticization" if I may be excused this neologism, and when the language requires, Manson becomes the simple car thief or pimp he's always been. ... The image reflected in this book is a hundred leagues away from the buffoon embittered by the lack of recognition of his peers, and the cult leader eager for blood and vengeance against the establishment. Schreck puts center stage the real culprits of the case, the demented Charles "Tex" Watson, who has become a repentant "good Christian" supported tooth and nail by a procession of fans, star hairdresser and notorious drug dealer Jay Sebring and his friend / sidekick / nemesis "Voytek" Frykowski, friend to Roman Polanski, the husband of the late Sharon Tate, and especially updates the tenuous links between Hollywood, the Mafia, the American prison system, the Pentagon, the CIA, and U.S. Secret Service. What might seem from afar to be yet another conspiracy theory as seen from outside proves entirely credible in these pages and sends shivers down your spine. Thus, the comparison between the mock trial of the Cielo Drive murders and the catastrophic Warren Commission Report is logically proven as a concealment of facts that can on no account be revealed to the light of day. That The Manson File names Dennis Wilson, Sammy Davis Jr., Kenneth Anger, Mama Cass or Anton LaVey is not especially surprising. More so is the appearance of Steve McQueen, Frank Sinatra and his daughter Nancy, "Lucky" Luciano, Jean Harlow or JFK. And the strength of this book is that it manages to establish these connections between these different figures as distant by their rank as their spatiotemporal situation, without falling into the lowest kind of grotesque sensationalism. And once the big picture is put together, the evidence is shown all too clearly to the reader. ... Please note, I am not saying here that we must accept all of Nikolas Schreck's arguments and conclusions, and it will suit each reader to form his own opinion. But after forty years spent swallowing the "politically correct" versions offered up the former protagonists of the case, whether defendants, prosecutors, former cops and even simple figures of the establishment at the time, The Manson File's luxurious "Apocalypse Edition" comes like a breath of fresh air, and most importantly, a door to a truth ... This detailed study, which is never content with a simple surface survey, or a simple research work on materials already available, scrapes tirelessly into the deepest reaches of Hollywood's second Golden Age ... Read The Manson File ...Manson was not present at the scene of any murder, he was two hundred miles away. Witnesses have stated such. There is no evidence placing him at the scene of crimes for which he was convicted. He was not allowed to testify at his own trial. He was not allowed to call any witnesses at his trial. He was not allowed to present any physical evidence at his trial. All of this is unconstitutional.The man who actually did the killings, Charles Watson, was tried separately from Manson and the three women who were convicted. The prosecution did not allow Manson to be tried separately from the three women. The women were coerced by prosecution to testify against Manson. Grand jury statements were made that were preposterous. One woman, Susan Atkins, was clearly mentally ill or under the influence of drugs when she made her grand jury testimony. No evaluation of her competence was ever made. She later rescinded her testimony, but it was still used in the trialEvidence was botched, lost, and possibly planted. A traffic ticket that Manson received placing him 200 miles away from the crimes at the time of the crimes was "lost".There was no testimony from any expert witness to corroborate the prosecution's claim of "mind control". I find that entire claim to be ludicrous anyhow; people cannot be hypnotized to perform actions against their moral code, and people cannot be "brainwashed" to do so either.Several of the victims of the crimes were involved in drugs, child pornography, and had gambling debts, which made them vulnerable to a "mob hit" or contractual killing. Tapes made by Roman Polanski, husband of a victim, which allegedly showed acts of child rape, were lost or suppressed. Polanski was later convicted of having anal sex with a 13 year old girl and fled the country. One theory is that the sex tapes were the motive for murder. Manson testified that he was asked by Polanski to procure young children for Polanski to use in his sex films.Manson admitted that he had knowledge of the crimes after the fact, but he swears that he had no foreknowledge of the crimes. Those who are accessories after the fact commonly are sentenced to 18 years in California. Originally, Manson was offered EIGHTEEN months by the prosecution if he would testify to the person who ordered the contractual killings. Because he declined to testify against a possible organized crime contractual killer, he was given the death penalty.Because Manson and his friends lived on a hippy commune and practiced unpopular things such as free love, there was bias against them in the jury pool and other areas of LEN. They were further targeted for their radical environmentalist activities such as burning an earth-mover (I do not agree with violent protest either, but 40 years in a supermax prison is extreme). Manson practiced shamanism in many forms, and condones the use of psychoactive botanicals and other substances for trance work. (For the record, I don't agree with this practice either, but still, no reason to incarcerate someone for 40 years).Finally, President Nixon had spoken out about the crimes, declaring Manson guilty; it was on the front page of the newspaper. Nixon allegedly declared Manson guilty as a method of suppressing the hippy movement which was then protesting the Vietnam war. The jury saw the statement made by the president, which should have caused a mistrial.If I am mistaken in this matter, then I am in good company. Jonny Depp, Henry Rollins, Elijah Blue Allman (Cher's son), Neil Young, Hank Williams III and many other prominent celebrities all feel that Manson was railroaded. Journalists worldwide have written exposes of the above findings. He is actually a political hero to the Palestinians. You don't believe everything the press has written about witchcraft, do you? Then why do you believe everything the media says about Manson? Investigate the case for yourself... read the trial transcripts... throw out the self-serving book written by the prosecution.
This true crime classic was published in 1974. The author, Victor Bugliosi, was Deputy District Attorney in L.A. and responsible for prosecuting the Tate-LaBianca murders. As this book was published a fairly short time after the actual events, it has a real immediacy, and Bugliosi’s insider knowledge makes the reading experience extremely interesting. The book opens with the murders, which are difficult to read about even after so long. On Saturday 9th August, 1969, screams and gunshots were heard from 10050 Cielo Drive. The bodies of actress Sharon Tate, heavily pregnant, Abigail Folger, heiress to a coffee fortune, Voytek Frykowski, a playboy, Jay Sebring, a celebrity hair stylist and Steve Parent, only eighteen, and caught up in events after visiting William Garretson, who lived in the nearby guest cottage to keep an eye on things for the owner of the house and care for his dogs, were discovered the next day by housekeeper Winifred Chapman. Garretson had not even heard the shots or screams reported by nearby neighbours, possibly as he was playing music loudly, although he did recall that the handle of his door was turned down, as though someone tried to enter the property. Luckily for him, he escaped further notice, although by sheer fact that he was nearby, he was considered the prime suspect at the time.On Sunday 10th August, Leno and Rosemary LaBianca returned home to Los Angeles after visiting Rosemary’s son in Lake Isabella. Dropping her daughter home, they picked up a newspaper from the stand and returned home. The next day their bodies were discovered when their son returned home and was concerned something was wrong at the house. Like the murders at Cielo Drive, the murders were savage and words were written, in blood, at the scene – including the infamous, “Healter Skelter,” (spelt incorrectly) at the LaBianca home.In July of that year, a music teacher, Gary Hinman, had been stabbed to death at his home. Like the scene at Cielo Drive and at the LaBianca house, words had been written in blood. However, the connection between the murders were initially ignored. In fact, apart from connections not being drawn, there were mistakes made during the investigation – including police officers obliterating prints at the Tate house and a gun found in the area, and handed in, being logged and forgotten about. The detectives leading the Tate murders were experienced, but set in their ways. Those involved with the LaBianca murders were younger, better educated and, although less experienced, more open minded. Indeed, they were the first to link the LaBianca crime with the Tate murders and even suggested the words written at the scene were from the Beatles latest album, the “White Album.”We read of evidence gathered, interviews and the rumours, and fear, that swept Hollywood. There were suggestions that the murders at Cielo Drive were linked to drug use and the victims were looked at by the press as ‘freaks’ and their murders viewed with a lack of sympathy. Meanwhile, chillingly, a news report on the mass murder included both a short report on the murders of the LaBianca couple alongside mention of a raid on an isolated ranch owned by George Spahn. A group which had been stealing cars and converting them to dune buggiesThe book then introduces those responsible for the terrible crimes. Gradually, the detectives become aware of Charles Manson and his ‘Family’. Largely this is because of members of the family themselves – Manson who bragged to biker Danny De Carlo and Susan Atkins, currently in prison after a raid on the ranch where the family lived, who told more than one other inmate that she had been involved in the killings. We then meet the author himself. Victor Bugliosi finds he is in charge of prosecuting the Tate-LaBianca murders and painstakingly sets about trying to build a case against the suspects and finding evidence. We follow him to the Spahn ranch, interviewing suspects and coming into contact with Charles Manson for the first time. The police are under immense pressure to wrap the case up as quickly as possible and Bugliosi resists giving deals to Susan Atkins and Linda Kasabian, which might see them literally getting away with murder. Indeed, when he finally takes the cases before the L.A. County grand jury on December 5th, jurors are stunned by Atkins nonchalant testimony, while recounting the horrific murders she openly admitted to being involved in. The book then moves on to the preparation for the trial. Bugliosi’s work is hampered with problems he has with the detectives investigating the Tate murders. He finds the LaBianca detectives far more conscientious and asks them to help him in the task of securing evidence and strengthening their case. He has the difficult task of convincing the jury of Manson’s domination over the Family. Meanwhile, Manson himself is acting as his own attorney, while endeavouring to bring the Family members under his control, even in prison. Not everybody is behind bars and many potential witnesses, such as Beach Boy Dennis Wilson, are living in fear and have received death threats, which makes Bugliosi’s harder.Surprisingly, despite being on trial for his involvement in vicious murders, much of the press and public seem to be enamoured by Manson. This love affair with the press is gaining the Family more converts. While the author seems perplexed by this, he is even more confused by the possible motives for the murders. He discovers that Manson quotes constantly from the Beatles and The Bible; plus he borrows various terms from Scientology and has an obsession with the Third Reich. Can Bugliosi convince a jury that the murders were committed because Manson believed the Beatles were sending him coded messages through the “White Album,” to begin a racial war in the United States? The trial itself is covered in great detail; from choosing the jury, through Manson’s courtroom antics. Victor Bugliosi was the prosecutor of the Tate and LaBianca trial and so is expertly placed to put us at the very heart of the case. It is obvious that fear was very real – members of the Family were camped outside the Court and carrying weapons openly. Celebrities such as Frank Sinatra, Elizabeth Taylor and Steve McQueen were said to be future targets, as well as those already involved in the case – from Bugliosi himself to possible witnesses. Indeed, before the end of the trial, there will be more crimes committed, including murder… The author’s central role in the proceedings helps give the book immense detail and also tension – as the author was truly dedicated to getting the victims of the Tate - LaBianca trial justice.The epilogue sees the author musing that, even though the defendants had been convicted, events were not yet over. How many murders did Manson and members of the Family commit? At the very least, there was also the murder of Gary Hinman and Donald “Shorty” Shea, as well as the attempted murder of witness Barbara Hoyt, the possible murder of one of the attorneys in the trial and threats to those involved in the case. Other things covered here, albeit briefly, is the trial of Charles “Tex” Watson, plots by the Family to free Manson and the others and the author’s musings on Manson’s beliefs.In 1975 this book won the Edgar Award for Best Fact Crime Book and I can easily see why. I have read this before, but found it even more engrossing on re-reading it. It would really be interesting to have the author update this book, as I would be fascinated to hear what he thinks about the case now. At the time he wrote this, the author did not expect Manson to be released from prison, but he did not oppose Susan Atkins release when she was seriously ill (which was denied and she died in prison in 2009) and other members of the Family are still incarcerated. I would certainly have liked to have had, perhaps, a new epilogue or an updated preface to this edition. Still, I recommend this to anybody interested in true crime
Do You like book Helter Skelter: The True Story Of The Manson Murders (2001)?
One of the most fascinating things about Jesus, if you ask me, isn't how he could have walked on water or was born of a virgin. Whether I believe that those thing happened or not is a different story. What is amazing (and completely proven) is that thousands of years ago Jesus was able to attract the attention of Jews and convince them that he was their savior -- and today, thousands of years later, that legend has survived. The question is, what exactly did Jesus do to make such an impact? The only answer that I can come up with is that, whatever it was, he must have been pretty fan-freaking-tastic. That's why I don't give a shit if he preformed miracles or not; I don't need them. I am convinced that Jesus was extraordinary based on his legend. I asked myself the same question when reading about Charles Mason in Helter Skelter. Mason wasn't educated or famous; in fact, his life sucked from the very beginning, he had no guidance, and spent about 90% of his life in jail or in orphanages, foster homes, etc. But his skills in identifying with weak people (and then perfectly capitalizing on their weaknesses) allowed him to attract the following of hundreds of people with loyalty so strong they would murder for him without hesitation. Manson referred to himself as "MAN SON" and Jesus Christ, and it's impossible to ignore how much the two had in common.Both were revolutionaries warning of change and an imminent Armageddon. Both carried incredibly unpopular messages that were very popular with a select few -- and in both cases some of the most devout followers were females. Both believed that all was one. Both said the only thing important is love. (Manson was quoted in Rolling Stone saying, "There has been no true love since the pharaohs. Except for J.C. He knew what love meant.") Both were put on trial. People have killed for both of them. I could keep going. Similar results, as well: a hard-core following of people who are willing to kill and be murdered for their leader, and dedicate their lives to carry out their leader's message. The biggest thing they didn't have in common is that they are actually TOTAL OPPOSITES. Manson was Christ-like in his attempt to be the Anti-Christ. Manson gained followers using sex, drugs, isolation, music, and his charismatic personality. Jesus carried only a powerful message. (And perhaps miracles. But if you don't believe in his miracles, the fact that people followed him so devoutly is even more notable.) I think in order to gain control like Christ, Charles Manson and Hitler had, the stars really have to align. The environment has to be ripe for change. You have to be able to coerce enough weak people that you can save them. The Apocalypse is a great word to throw around. I'm trying to think... is Osama Bin Ladin like this? Or is it totally different?Anyway, Helter Skelter is an UNBELIEVABLE story told in a captivating way. I had a nightmare the first night after reading it and I have been super-suspicious of my new neighbors, who moved in the same day. I have spent an embarrassing amount of time spying on them through the peep-hole. This is a great story for any interested in law, human nature, religion, murder, The Beatles, Hollywood, and down right fucked-up-ed-ness. That all is there. Along with creeeEEEeeeepy pictures. Something that also carried me through the book: Charles Manson was incredibly hot. That man had some lustrous locks!
—l
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.Those are the opening lines of Helter Skelter. Decades after I had first read it, I could recall that first sentence almost word for word. The book has that kind of haunting quality. A lot of that may be due to the less well-known co-author, Curt Gentry, because in contrast Bugliosi's other book about a murder case he was involved in, And the Sea Will Tell was much less memorable and engrossing. Of course, it's hard to imagine a case more fascinating than the Manson Murders. You have celebrity victims such as Sharon Tate, the pregnant wife of the famous director Roman Polański; you have the murderers, cult leader Charlie Manson and "his Family" and what has to be the most bizarre motive in the history of American jurisprudence. And whether he contributed to the literary quality of the book, certainly Vincent Bugliosi contributes the intimate knowledge and perspective of someone closely involved--he prosecuted Manson for the Tate/LaBianca murders. I read this in my early teens, if not younger, and it made a deep impression on me. As a child, decades before Law and Order, my idea of a lawyer came from such shows as Perry Mason that gave all the glory to defense attorneys. This was the first glimmer I had that prosecutors could be heroes too. The book won a 1975 Edgar Award for Best Fact Crime book and I can understand why. One of the classic true crime books.
—Lisa (Harmonybites)
So, here's my weird connection to Charles Manson: my mom very briefly knew Linda Kasabian. Linda was the key witness for the prosecution. She moved to my small hometown after the trial and that's how my mom got to know her a bit. She even came to our house once. Apparently, I met her too, though I was just a baby. My mom did not realize who she was until some time later - Linda had changed her last name to hide/protect her identity. She only lived in our town a short time before moving out of state.Anyway, so it was interesting for me to learn more about her as well as the Manson story in general. The book is written by the lead prosecutor, so it reads a bit like a police report or court room news piece, but it's a good read nonetheless. Disturbing, as these things always are, but fascinating as well. 3.5 stars.
—Laurel
