Okay Crawler you didnt know, but in the one thread I go on a rant against that Dave Edwards JACKASS (YEAH YOU KNOW YOU ARE DAVE, and ALSO A MEMBER HERE). That guy gives morons a new name and rushed out that piece of junk piece. Came here and joined up-ran to the Col's blog where he stood crying like a boy who peed in his knickers about us here. The Col took no part in it, called JACKASS DAVE out on a few things and Dave wouldnt respond. (though he was a member of the COl's site as well). So, I penned a note and posted it here for him-he could have responded-he is a member here. And the Colonel was gracious enough to post it as well. The fool wouldnt answer. Phew. I know Crawler you didnt know. :cats21:
It makes interesting reading if one pursues the "Joel Pugh death by homicide"; unfortunately, that is about it, interesting reading. I think the evidence is compelling that his death at such a young age was by suicide. Simon Wells' book, "Charles Manson Coming Down Fast" (most recent edition) pages ,380-392, is the best resource to clarify the issue of Joel Pugh's death. Also, some of the posts, particularly #s 16, 17, & 19 (this topic) offer insightful reading.
What really pissed me off about that Daily Mail article was the words: Now, 40 years on, the Mail has uncovered evidence suggesting Joel did not die by his own hand but was murdered at the orders of cult leader Charles Manson. What evidence? Nothing new at all ... and nothing in the article that could be remotely mistaken for evidence. I wrote to David Edwards and to the Daily Mail, asking "what new evidence?", "what evidence?", but got no reply. You'll also see my comment on the Mail web page. Tossers. I'm with Cats on this one. Jem
Ok lets take a breath.......I am with you guys. Did not know this a-hole would disrespect my fellow fanatic's! (That is meant in the best not worst way!) :wacky:
The biggest thing that stuck out tome was, his parents going to london and seeing all the reports, and agreeing with them. :hippie:
I am just reading this, haven't gone down through the whole page 3 and page 4 of this forum, so don't know if anyone asked this, but was the property as tightly locked up and secure back in 1969 as it is now? Just wondering? Thanks. bb
Amazon U.K. definitely has it (Simon Wells')......Also, I believe it can be ordered through the Amazon.Com through Google Books......... I am not sure about 5 to Die..... Good Luck!
5 To Die was just re-relaesed last year and should be easy to find. I bought a copy from Jerry LeBlanc's website a few months ago. I can't remember if I found the website using the title or his name. There were 2 writers, the other was Ivor Davis. You should be able to find the re-release pretty easily but the first printing is a hard find. I think I have two copies, I will PM you if I do. I can't remember if I sold one or not. I always search ebay looking for someone selling CM books and video that doesn't know their worth. I bought the Watkins book for 5 bucks, if you can believe that. Keep an eye open on ebay and half.com for Manson stuff, you never know what you'll find. Good Luck. . . .
It doesn't look as though anything has been done to the Hotel for years. I imagine it is pretty much the same since then. The road outside wouldn't have been as congested as it was in 1969, but it was still a busy trunk road. The back, I really cannot say, but the wall outside of it appears as old as the building itself. But then one would have to know that Joel was staying in that exact spot/room to break in via the rear (if indeed anyone did). This in turn would have meant that someone having visited Joel at some point to know he was there. When I am next up in London, I will take some film of the property, back and front, and so you can all get a true perspective of the place. Regards Si
:tnku: for answering my question, and let me say it is nice to meet you. I've heard your name spoken of, didn't know who you were, just another member, then found out you are a published writer. Now, I shall probably be all tongue tied around you since you are a celebrity. Anyway, thanks for answering my question so soon. I figured that you would be busy and I wouldn't hear back for awhile. Again, nice to meet you and to "talk" to you. Sincerely yours, Bottled Brunette
Dear all, Just going through my files at the moment and have found this in very high-def. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7aS3Q_ChowA/TCDndxI6dgI/AAAAAAAAAF4/GxLXdq35pz0/s1600/talgarth.jpg I intend to pop back there in the new year and do a comprehensive photoshoot of the hotel. You will be the first to see my results. Si x
And then there is always the possibility that Sandy wasn't his follower, as she has insisted, but because of her own nature went off and did this, but I suppose that is to much to accept as different from what we have been trained to believe.
Sorry, but I don't understand this. Sandy wasn't whose follower? She went off and did what? And don't we all probably believe different things, whoever (if anyone) 'trains' us? Jem
