Rick Spence
speaker
498 appearances
1 recordings
1 series
first heard Oct 2024
last heard Oct 2024
Rick Spence’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
So I don't know what's going on there, but it's a curious kind of situation. Yeah. And Manson, in a lot of ways, just kind of self-immolates himself. I mean, his behavior at the trial is bizarre. It's threatening. It's disruptive. He's got his girls out on the street carving X's in their forehead, carrying knives.
One of the attorneys, initially his attorney, Ron Hughes, becomes Van Houten's attorney. And he figures out that the three girls, supposedly on Charlie's insistence, are going to confess. And they confess that it was all their idea and Charlie had nothing to do with it.
Hughes doesn't like this because his defense for her is that she was under his influence and therefore not responsible for her own actions. He was having psychic control. So he refuses to go along with it. There's a break in the trial. He goes camping up in the mountains with some friends and Disappears during a rainstorm, and then some months later, his decomposed remains are found.
Now, rumors, always the rumors. Okay. What would history be without rumors? Hell, that, ah, see, members of the family, they were pissed off at Ron Hughes because he messed up Charlie's idea to get him off, and so they killed him. Oh, maybe they did. Maybe he drowned. That's absolutely impossible to say. You got that kind of story.
There's a guy named Juan Flynn who was an employee at the spawn ranch. Didn't like Manson. Held Manson responsible for the murder of his boss. He would testify that Manson told him that he had ordered all the killings and that Manson also admitted that he had killed 35 people. Maybe he did.
On the other hand, Juan Flynn didn't like him and he had no, other than his word, had no real proof of what he was saying. So, please understand me in this case, is that unlike some people who argue that Charles Manson got a raw deal, I don't think that's the case. I think that he influenced tremendous influence over the people there through drugs, through
Sex was another frequent component in it. He had a real whammy over a lot of these people's minds. I'm not sure how. That still kind of puzzles me. He was a scrawny guy. And he wasn't physically intimidating. I mean, even a lot of women wouldn't be physically intimidated by him. But he nevertheless had this real psychological power.
And if you look around him, the male followers he had were fairly big guys. so he could get people to do what he wanted. And again, to me, the simplest explanation for this is that it began with the Hinman killing and probably on Manson's instigation, the others were copycat killings to throw off what was going on.
That would, if I was a cop, that's what I would focus on, because that seems to make the most sense.
Yes, the great focus on Charlie the Leader, the excessive devotion.
No, I think that Manson, again, was essentially a criminal. He had a sociopathic mindset, and he hit upon a pretty good deal.
They have some sort of what we like to call dysfunctional families. Yeah. A lot of the females in particular seem to have come from more or less middle-class families, but those are full of dysfunction. Their parents didn't love them. They were semi-runaways, and now they had this whole family. A lot of the younger women had children. You know, some of them by Manson, some of them by the others.
They sort of bonded together.
Well, California... But I'm from. So I remember this period vividly. Okay. So by the way, the Tate LaBianca killings occurred on my birthday, the year I graduated from high school. So I remember this. Happy birthday. A term which has been used for that, there's a writer by the name of Todd Wood who's coined, I wish I'd come up with this, killer-fornia.
Mm-hmm.
And which is just sort of a chronicle of the serial killers and disappearances in the late 60s and 70s. So you've got the Zodiac, you've got other ones. I mean, you know, I hate to say it, I'm not trying to be flippant about it, but I mean, young female hitchhikers were disappearing at an alarming rate in Northern California. There are bodies that have never been attributed.
Some think that they're the Zodiac's victims, but it was a dangerous time. Uh, Edmund Kemper, you know, the co-ed killer was, was another one. And there were a lot of, uh, creepy psychopaths running around. I don't know if it was something in the water or what was going on, but it was a menacing in some cases. Um,
Hitchhiking, especially if you were alone and female, was not something you wanted to do in much of the Golden State. Certainly not if around the Bay Area. So a lot of these strange sort of killings that were going on. The Zodiac is one of those things where you have these people who have theories about it.
And if you don't share their theory, then you're part of the problem in some form or another. So I'm not sure, for instance, that the Zodiac killings were all committed by the same person. I think there might have been multiple people involved. And the first killings are all of couples.
It's very sort of clear that they... I remember in my examination of it, one of the things I was looking at specific, what else is there to say about the Zodiac killing? So what I was going to look at is that there are all of these accusations that there is an occult aspect to it. There was some sort of ritualistic... So I looked at different things, locations, victims, phases of the moon.
Showing 401–420 of 498 · page 21 of 25
← Previous
Next →