I like to stop the microwave with just one second left.

It makes me feel like I’ve expertly diffused a bomb. Lol





Authorities confirmed Thursday that mass murderer Charles Manson is back in a Bakersfield hospital, though the severity of his condition is unclear. But there are some reports he is in grave condition.

Kern County Sheriff’s Lt. Bill Smallwood confirms that Manson is at a local hospital but could not say more.

In January, Manson, 82, was rushed to Mercy Hospital in Bakersfield for what authorities at the time would describe only as a serious medical problem.

Manson and members of his “family” of followers were convicted of killing actress Sharon Tate and six other people during a bloody rampage in the Los Angeles area in August 1969. Prosecutors said Manson and his followers were trying to incite a race war he dubbed “Helter Skelter,” taken from the Beatles song of the same name.

Tate, the wife of director Roman Polanski, was 8 ½ months pregnant when she was killed at her hilltop home in Benedict Canyon on Aug. 9, 1969. Four others were stabbed and shot to death the same night: Jay Sebring, 35; Voytek Frykowski, 32; Abigail Folger, 25, a coffee heiress; and Steven Parent, 18, a friend of Tate’s caretaker. The word “pig” was written on the front door in blood.

The next night, Manson rode with his followers to the Los Feliz home of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, then left three members to kill the couple.

Manson was initially sentenced to death. But a 1972 ruling by the California Supreme Court found the state’s death penalty law at the time unconstitutional, and his sentenced was changed to life in prison with the possibility of parole. He has been denied parole 12 times.

During his four decades of incarceration, Manson has been anything but a model prisoner. Among other things, Manson has been cited for assault, repeated possession of a weapon, threatening staff and possessing a cellphone, Thornton said this week.






The number of U.S. police departments outfitting their officers with body cameras increases each year, but the cameras can pose a threat to civil rights if the departments fail to set rules that govern when officers review footage from their cameras, according to a new report.

The vast majority of the nation’s biggest police departments allow officers to watch footage from body cameras whenever they want, including before they write their incident reports or make statements, said the report, which was released Tuesday by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

“Unrestricted footage review places civil rights at risk and undermines the goals of transparency and accountability,” said Vanita Gupta, former head of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division and current head of the Leadership Conference, in the report’s introduction.

Because an officer’s memory of an event may be altered by watching body camera footage, doing so will likely alter what officers write in their reports. That, in turn, can make it more difficult for investigators or courts to assess whether the officer’s actions were reasonable based on what he or she perceived at the time of the incident, states the report, “The Illusion of Accuracy: How Body-Worn Camera Footage Can Distort Evidence.”

Body camera programs are in place at 62 of the 69 largest U.S. police departments, according to a scorecard released Tuesday by the Leadership Conference. Most of those departments—55, or almost 80 percent—allow officers to view their footage whenever they want.

The Leadership Conference report advises that police departments institute a “clean reporting” policy, under which officers write an initial incident report before reviewing any footage. Only afterward would they watch the footage and write a second, supplementary report.

“We make the case that in the interests of consistency, fairness, transparency and accountability, clean reporting should be adopted as a standard practice for all police departments with body-worn camera programs,” writes Gupta in the introduction.

Some policing experts say officers should view the footage before writing a report to make sure the account is correct.

“They want to be as accurate as they can,” Lance LoRusso, an ex-cop and current Atlanta attorney who represents police officers, told the Associated Press. “This specter that every time an officer looks at the video they’re going to lie and adapt their statement just is infuriating because we want the officers to write the most accurate report they can.”


It is interesting that the same groups that were demanding that officers wear body cams, but now realize that those same body cams are used as evidence against them and want to complain about that. It’s the old saying be careful what you ask for you just may get it.

I related as similar to when they brought in slow motion instant replay to professional sports like baseball, and it showed for the most part how good the umpires and referees were. But it did help tremendously when there were problems and there seemed to be ongoing problems too.

You can’t complain for years about something that you want, or you think you need, to monitor the police and then complain about it when you get it, you need to live with it.



300 pairs of underwear were found on a roadside,

police suspected a car accident due

to the amount of skid marks…


With the Frank Carson et al trial starting in a few weeks, I have been asked if I am going to start podcasts again. Below is a poll to let you guys decide if it is wanted and people are going to participate.

Like anything the podcasts are not free and if there is not enough interest to participate and support financially, then there will be no way to get it done.

If you note I do not sell advertising on my site and never plan to. The website is a business plan and is constant expense to be able to maintain the services available on it. And the donation site has not received any donations in almost a year.

So, let me know how you feel in the poll below in regard to this, and understand either way I am going to continue posting the daily activities of the case to keep all informed.

Thank all for your support and let’s see this through.



FRANK CARSON et al 11-15-2015 pm


by Marty Carlson


The afternoon session was scheduled to start at 1330 hrs. and upon entering the courtroom all attorneys were called into chambers, in fact they were called in there twice that usually means some type of problem. Court finally went into session around 1400 hrs.

The judge stated that during the lunch hour she checked into the motion that attorney Hans when referred to in his argument during the morning. The judge was confused on whose motion it was initially that was filed and never saw Hans motion either. Apparently, she is also supposed be notified by email when these come in and she was not. She stated apparently this one fell through the cracks as it was originally scheduled to be on another date, but it did not happen.

She advised Hans that he can supplement his current motion that he’s arguing today and also give the District Attorney’s Office a chance to respond. There appeared to be a lot of confusion with judge Zuniga about when to have the remaining arguments of the sanctions motion. The district attorney also noted that they may want to put on some evidence.

Judge Zuniga stated that there was a tentative ruling in chambers and stated that she was looking at section 177.5 CCP, listed below, and called it a specific statute and not just a general statute for sanctions.

She then decided to discuss some scheduling, and then again really got confusing. She stated that she wants her the case cites by the 22nd in addition to the DAs opposition on the 22nd. She stated there is a 1538.5 hearing scheduled for the 28th and 29th possibly the 30th of this month, in addition to other motions like a 1539 contempt motion against Kirk Bunch. She also noted that there is a hearing this Friday at 11 AM and to tell you the truth I have no idea what that is for because this hearing was totally screwed up and unable to comprehend.

She also requested all attorneys to meet and confer for possible resolution of some of the in limine motions and other issues that are coming up.

Again, another reason why these hearings never get finished because of the lack of coordination and organization in this courtroom. It apparently does no good to put out a schedule of court dates because they constantly get changed, and like today attorney Hans argument got interrupted in the middle and is now unable to finish it in a timely fashion.

It is probably just a coincidence, but it is interesting that this occurred during a segment of Hans argument in discussing some of the issues with the evidence like the jacket and the shirt and discrepancy in the testimony and the so-called injuries in the clothes.

California Code of Civil Procedure Section 177.5

177.5. A judicial officer shall have the power to impose reasonable money sanctions, not to exceed fifteen hundred dollars ($1,500), notwithstanding any other provision of law, payable to the court, for any violation of a lawful court order by a person, done without good cause or substantial justification. This power shall not apply to advocacy of counsel before the court. For the purposes of this section, the term person includes a witness, a party, a party s attorney, or both.

Sanctions pursuant to this section shall not be imposed except on notice contained in a party s moving or responding papers; or on the court’s own motion, after notice and opportunity to be heard. An order imposing sanctions shall be in writing and shall recite in detail the conduct or circumstances justifying the order.



Here is the am report