The Tate-LaBianca Homicide Research Blog

StarCity Radio will be interviewing Stephen Kay this Sunday at 8pm. http://starcityradio.com/tlbradio.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My two cents on the Motive Discussion

which has ensued (in the comments section of this thread).

Weigh-in Folks!

Polanski states cautiously (during his lie detector test) that Sebring "may have had a job delivering drugs" ... and that Voytek had been "sniffing cocaine for at last two years".

Starship has (also) clarified other drug-motive information within the comments section.

Starship States:
"where there's smoke there is usually fire. The Canadians were the very first suspects for Cielo. I hate typing on the fly without sources but I think even Bugliosi has it that VF was experimenting with MDA that very weekend because he was expecting to conclude a deal with the Canadians so that he could lock up the MDA distribution business in SoCal. Rumors about Jay being burned for 20 grand worth of coke, plus he owed tons of money. Joel Rostau delivers drugs to Jay and VF just hours before the murders, is supposed to get more but doesn't...and he ends up dead in the trunk of a car at Kennedy Airport in NY in an apparent mob hit just four months later.
That's alot of smoke. So although you may object about some of them being labelled 'dealers' they certainly seemed to be dealing with drugs one way or the other, which may have led to this nastiness.
Now, I agree with you about the LaBiancas. There is lots of talk about it, but no proof. Leno owed money. Rosemary had money. But that's it".

In regards to drugs at Tate, there is smoke from various independent sources... and they all have Frykowski as suspect one, and Sebring as suspect two. 
There's certainly enough sources and smoke, to make the drug motive (at Tate) worthy of consideration and close inspection.

As for Hinman, (to my knowledge), most of the sources who have Gary pegged as a drug dealer, are primarily the perpetrators.  That makes me skeptical.

As for LaBianca, (in my opinion), one has to consider Leno's heavy gambling debts.
It's well documented in the homicide reports, that Leno was a raging horse gambler and his debts were large.

Can I prove anything... No.

It's also possible as Leary and TomG have suggested before, that these murders were simply acts of complete madness... perpetrated for no practical reason(s).
As Tom once said concisely:
"Think long, think wrong".

Leary and Tom have both (essentially) suggested, that we've all overthought this whole thing.
I believe their assertion/theory is just as valid (and possible) as any.

BUT...
If one would pursue a practical path/motive... I've always adhered to a drug motive for Tate... and a gambling motive for LaBianca. 
There's simply more "smoke" (and documentation) along those paths than any other...

My next motive choice for Tate, is very basic:
Charlie is bitter and torched over the whole music scene--Melcher--Hollywood concept.
In this theory, Manson is bitter (in general) as it were, with "Hollywood pigs"... etc.
This theory basically goes hand-in-hand with Leary and Tom's bare-bones mindset... which is general bitterness for bitterness sake.
And, I do believe Manson was (and still is) a very bitter bastard... even though he tries unceasingly (and quite convincingly with many) to hide it.

My two cents...

To Recap:

I think there's really only 2 routes one can go with this.

Route #1:
Look for a practical motive for both locations, which leads one (in my estimation) to drugs at Cielo and Leno's gambling debts at Waverly.

OR

Route #2:
Agree with Harold True, that "one cannot ascribe reason to crazy people"... and chalk it all up, to madness for madness sake.
This is actually not so far-fetched.
These acts were senseless.
Attempting to pinpoint sensible reasons for senseless acts, may very well be... as Harold True, Leary and TomG have advanced... a futile effort.