![]() ![]() ![]() With this in mind, Susan Atkins’ version of what happened during the summer of 1969 is patently more credible than the bizzare Helter Skelter theory, upon which prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi based his case against Charles Manson and his followers in 1970. Occam’s razor holds that if you have two competing explanations for something, the simpler one is usually correct. I think I would've respected her more if she had simply left it at "I take full responsibility for my actions." This isn't a parole hearing or trial, you know. The part that bugs me a bit is her constant "I take full responsibility for my actions.but I didn't do anything". This does give you something to think about, and alot of what she says makes sense. ![]() The auther now suggests that this was not the case at all, and she is actually able to back-up her claims with alot of information from many different books on the subject: Vincent Bugliosi (the D.A.), Charles Watson, Paul Watkins both men known Manson family members), and hers, as well as notes from the actual trial. Whereas, up till now, it has been understood that these murders were Charle's Mansons' way of starting a race war that he believed was imminent. ![]() This book offers up a different motive to the "Helter Skelter" murders of 1969. I've even read Susan Atkins-Whitehouse's first book, Child of God/ Child of Satan, which I found very interesting. I have read several books on Charles Manson and his family. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |