Charles "Tex" Watson, "Manson's right hand man" (if you can say that without getting nauseous) was of course denied parole earlier this week- but the drama and controversy with those 'Tex' tapes may be at the highest level yet. For anyone who don’t know, the 47-year-old tapes contain recordings of young Tex Watson talking to his onetime attorney about the crimes and the Manson family, just prior to being arrested.
The tapes are currently in possession of the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office who have consistently been inconsistent with the tapes contents, as well as their reasons for not releasing them. The DA’s office wouldn’t even know about the tapes if not for Journalist Tom O’Neill who appears to have done all the due diligent work to get the tapes only to have the People slap a truck load of red tape legalities around them, which is incredibly suspicious in itself. He then published an article in 2014 about the ‘run around’ and confirmed several comments made by the DA, LAPD, and a few of the victim’s family including Debra Tate; who told O’Neill, “He minimizes the girl’s participation” Another statement was that Tex was talking about how much control Manson had”
The journalist recently wrote another article on the tapes proving even more bizarre shady behavior from authorities, that undoubtedly makes everyone want to know more- What are authorities and the People so afraid of the public knowing? Both articles are about his experience with authorities on this subject are very interesting when thinking of our justice system displaying such confusing and suspicious behavior. A must read, (See below- each link navigate to each article)
RICH PFEIFFER'S EXPERIENCE WITH THE TAPES AND THE DA'S OFFICE
Of course this became very interesting to Van Houten’s attorney, who said the tapes are exculpatory evidence. He has stated on numerous occasions he will stop at nothing to get those tapes – And has made good on the attempts. Unfortunately, every attempt has been denied thus far. He filed new writs with the Superior Court on July 29, 2016 (denied October 6, 2016), and the Second Appellate Court, October 7, 2016 (denied October 20, 2016). On October 12, 2016, Pfeiffer filed a formal complaint to the California State Bar against the District Attorney’s office — charging, among other things, that the office had violated the California Rules of Professional Conduct by refusing to release exculpatory evidence (the tapes) to him, and being “untruthful” to the Board of Parole Hearings in their representation of his reasons for wanting them (to show that Van Houten wasn’t lying about the amount of control Manson exerted over her). The result of that action is pending.
PFEIFFER'S LETTER TO THE D.A; GOVERNOR BROWN COPIED IN IT (PRIOR TO THE REVERSAL)
CASE UPDATES AND INFO
-Trial of the Century
-Susan Atkins-Patricia Krenwinkel
-Parole Transcripts 1985-2017
Franklin Hearing transcript 2017
-Tex Watson Tapes
-Criteria Parole Suitability
-Rich Pfeiffer's letter to the DA
-Parole Reversed 2016