Lynyrd responds to Grim Traveller, talks "motive", and cuts through the bullshit.

Grim said:
“Obviously we're talking TLB as opposed to Hinman/Shea/{Crowe} but it seems that a consensus seems to lean towards HS being the thing that ties Charlie to TLB and if HS is discredited, the link is severed and thusly, the guilt. 

The Emmons book has been discredited by Manson as bullshit which has left him free to state that he didn't know about the copycat {even though Bugliosi says in HS that he admits he knew the murders were going to happen}. 

I find few people genuinely push the anger towards society or lack of a record contract angle, I've not heard anyone other than Bugliosi push the bloodlust angle and the drug hits or Frykowski raping Linda K scene tend to emphasize Tex rather than Charlie as does the Suzan LaBerge wanting her Mum dead scenario. The Mafia hit for the black book seems more a supposition than a bona fide theory that many are prepared to hang their hats on.

If you take George Stimson's line to it's logical conclusion, Charles Manson had nothing to do with anything regarding TLB. I can understand why so many seem to take that line.”

Lynyrd Responds:

There may be plenty of people who believe that successfully refuting Helter Skelter (i.e., "proving" another motive) equates to clearing Charlie of all culpability and guilt.

I don't believe it's quite that easy.

By the time the Cielo/Waverly murders rolled around, the kids were puppets and Manson was pulling the strings.

Regardless of the reason these numbskulls were at Cielo and Waverly, Manson was "directing traffic".

Even without the "HS" story, there are plenty of signposts which strongly suggest that Manson was in-charge of this murderous group.

When Manson shaved his head, the kids followed suit.
When Manson carved an "X", the kids followed suit.
The girls literally crawled across town, on their hands and knees.
The kids were willing to die in the gas chamber for Manson.
Lawyers and psychologists alike, have described the kids feverish devotion to Manson as extreme.
Lynn and Sandy devoted decades of their lives to Manson.

Manson told the girls to get a change of clothes.
Manson told them to do whatever Tex instructed.
Manson told them to leave something witchy.
Manson tied-up Leno Labianca.
Several people from the "Family" described Manson as the ringleader.
One of them stated (I believe it was Paul Watkins), that "nothing happened without Charlie's approval".

The list goes on and on...

It's obvious, that "Helter Skelter" was a great tool for Bugliosi.
There's no denying that fact.
Bugliosi's job of implicating Manson, would have been MUCH more difficult without "Helter Skelter" at his disposal.
In the end, without "HS", Bugliosi may have failed at proving Manson's guilt. (and yes, he was guilty)
I agree with all that.

But...
To believe that Manson is "by default" innocent (without HS as the "proven motive") is a stretch.

And might I add:
No one has EVER "proven" an alternate motive (to everyone's satisfaction) anyway.
And believe me,  no one ever will.

The "consensus" means little to me.
And polls regarding “motive“ are worthless (beyond entertainment) , because “the majority” is often dead wrong.
And truth be told, I don't put a whole lot of stock into most of the "experts" and "authors" on this topic either.

A LONG time ago, TomG said:
"Think long, think wrong."

He was spot-on with that statement.

People have over-analyzed this shit to death.
The books just keep getting thicker... and they simply contain more loopholes to overcome.

Let me break it down in simple terms:

By the time the TLB murders took place, Charlie was a bitter motherfucker.
He was angry with society and life itself.

He manipulated these kids with several methods (one of them being HS), and when he had them thoroughly wrapped around his finger, he set them loose to do his bidding.

Not being a lawyer, Charlie believed he could never be charged with murder (without physically killing someone). He figured he could exact his revenge on society, and then, walk-away scot-free.

That's the whole fucking story in a nutshell.

There's nothing else to know. 

And yes, for those who don't think so, Manson was bitter.

Manson tells everyone out of the right side of his mouth, that he's happy and content.
But out of the left side of his mouth, he never lets anyone forget that he "never had a so-called life", as he always says.
He "never had a so-called childhood".
He tells society: "watch tv and drink your beer”. (as his song lyrics go)

Folks like to research (and entertain) elaborate motive theories for four reasons:

#1) It sells books and movies.

#2) It makes the researcher(s) feel important. 
      (I know, I was there myself for years)

#3) It makes the case, the study, and the discussion (of TLB) more interesting. If you take things at face value, there's really not much to talk about. 
      (And, we're back to #2).

#4) And finally, the folks who support Charles Manson invest their lives searching for a theory to exonerate him. (And, that's never going to happen). This is pretty much Katie's original point, and the discussion has come full circle.

Note:

This entire post is not directed at Grim Traveller personally or specifically. Grim’s comment was the catalyst that got me thinking (and writing) on this subject, and that’s why I chose to include his commentary as my jump-off point.