Post by elantric on Aug 8, 2020 14:23:56 GMT -6
Below Steven parent Eyeglasses Info SOURCE
(Eyeglass Pics were resurrected using google)
SOURCE
source
www.mansonblog.com/2016/12/a-little-bit-about-caretakers-friend.html
About 11 P.M. Steve Parent stopped at Dales Market in El Monte and asked his friend John LeFebure if he wanted to go for a ride. Parent had been dating John’s younger sister Jean. John suggested they make it another night.
About forty-five minutes later Steve Parent arrived at the Cielo address, hoping to sell William Garretson a clock radio. Parent left the guest house about 12: 15 A.M. He got as far as his fathers 1966 AMC Ambassador."
About forty-five minutes later Steve Parent arrived at the Cielo address, hoping to sell William Garretson a clock radio. Parent left the guest house about 12: 15 A.M. He got as far as his fathers 1966 AMC Ambassador."
Was he possibly shot in the house ( left his glasses there) after being targeted by Sebring & Wojciech Frykowski, as the thief of their missing drugs - and died trying to make an escape
(Glasses below sure look like a 100% match for Steven Parents EyeGlasses seen in his Yearbook pic above.
Pair of Glasses Gives Police Solid Clue in Tate Murders
Sunday, October 26th, 1969
Los Angeles police have disclosed that the killer of Sharon Tate and four others left this pair of glasses at the scene. The flier shown gives a sketchy portrait of killer.
LOS ANGELES, Oct. 26 —The killer of actress Sharon Tate and four other persons left a pair of amber-rimmed eyeglasses at the scene, police revealed Thursday.
Detective Lt. Robert Helder, the man in charge of the investigation, told a news conference police have been able to reconstruct from the glasses a sketchy portrait of the murderer.
He is probably a man between 20 to 40 years old. He has a small head and one of his ears is about a quarter of an inch lower than the other. He is extremely nearsighted.
Helder said there were some fingerprint smudges on the glasses, but no identifiable “ridges” investigators could use to trace their owner.
The glasses were intact, no blood was found on them and there was no hair caught in the frames. Helder said they were “one of the key pieces of evidence” in the murders, but he would not elaborate except to say no murder weapons had been found.
Police still have no motive for the macabre slayings Aug. 9 at the Benedict Canyon estate leased by Miss Tate and her husband, Roman Polanski.
“It could be almost anything,” the detective said. “If we could pinpoint a motive, we’d be halfway home.”
Helder said police had the glasses analyzed by experts in optometry and determined that they were inexpensive, had a popular American-made frame and a “not highly unusual” combination of lenses kept by many optometrists in “bins” in their offices.
Helder said it was his opinion the killer lost the glasses while struggling with one of the murder victims. He said the assailant, because of his nearsightedness, probably left quickly.
A flier describing the glasses was sent six weeks ago to the 2,968 members of the California Optometric Association, the Chicago headquarters of the American Optometric Association with 15,000 members, the Los Angeles City Optometric Society and the Ophthalmologists Society of Southern California.
Helder said police have received no replies from anyone remembering prescribing similar glasses.
www.cielodrive.com/archive/pair-of-glasses-gives-police-solid-clue-in-tate-murders/#:~:text=Los%20Angeles%20police%20have%20disclosed%20that%20the%20killer%20of%20Sharon
- as the paint from the broken fence matches his rear bumber
murdersofaugust69.freeforums.net/thread/1103/cielo-fence
source
www.mansonblog.com/2016_12_05_archive.html#:~:text=This%20diagram%20was%20constructed%20by%20me%20from%20an%20arial%20view
Details on 1966 AMC Ambassador Transmission
auto.howstuffworks.com/1967-1968-amc-ambassador3.htm
A Look At the Evidence #3: The Death of Steven Parent (Who told it best?)
This diagram was constructed by me from an arial view of the property probably taken either late on the 9th of August or perhaps even on the 10th or later. One police car stands guard. Steven Parent’s car has been removed and the investigators are gone. My ‘car’ symbol may be a little small given the size of the police car but its close enough for what I am trying to illustrate.
I assumed Steven Parent parked his car at location #1. It made sense to me. He would have been largely ‘out of view’ of the main house at that location and still in the common parking area with the other cars. Those cars likely would have drawn him to that location. It also seemed to line up with the damaged fence (where the blue lines meet the fence) on a fairly natural arc. He could have parked more to the left and next to the Firebird. He also could have parked at car location #6 and backed straight back into the fence. This location (#6) would also put his car completely out of sight from the house.
The other blue lines represent two paths Steven Parent could have taken to the gate. Again, precision is not necessary although the lines are probably pretty close.
The red lines represent two possible paths the killers took after crossing the fence reflecting the fact they either had to enter the driveway in front of the wall (between the gate and the wall) or behind the wall.
“XXX” is the general area where Watson and the rest would have been had they immediately seen SP’s headlights after climbing over the fence as Kasabian claimed at the Watson trial. That is about the location in the picture above that looks towards the wall. This is clearly more then a ‘few feet’ from any possible location for Steven Parent's car. Therefore, if Kasabian is right about the distance, they were not at XXX.
“X” and “XX” mark two other locations where Atkins, Kasabian and Krenwinkel could have been located when Watson confronted Steven Parent. From these you can identify a myriad of other locations along the two routes. These locations (“X” and “XX”) however, put the three women close to Watson’s possible location.
The yellow triangle is a representation of SP’s headlights and the yellow arc shows how they would have moved from top to bottom as he made his turn towards the gate. In order to avoid being exposed by the headlights Watson, Krenwinkel, Atkins and Kasabian had to be somewhere in front of the wall near “X”.
Car location #2 places Steven Parent at the gate button. I believe the physical evidence makes it unlikely he was there when Watson confronted him. Why? Looking at the photo above from Cielodrive.com (thank you, by the way) from inside the gate looking out and the first photo, above, there doesn’t appear to be any room for Watson to stand next to the driver’s side door and attack Parent. The wall is higher and wider at the end where it forms the pillar about 5-6 feet tall and about two to three feet wide. The button is beyond the pillar closer to the gate but near the pillar. His car would be at most about 1-1.5 feet from the button (if not closer) and the pillar so he could reach it without getting out of the car. The pillar and the gate button, then would largely block access to the driver’s side window unless Parent was further from the wall and planned to exit the car to open the gate. Steven Parent would have also been stopped at that point rendering the command ‘Halt!’ rather meaningless.
Car loacation #3 assumes Watson stopped Steven Parent just before he approached the gate button. Watson would be at “A” approaching either from the “XX” or “X”. Location #3 seems to be the most likely scenario, especially if he approached from the cover of the wall from “X”. Steven Parent would have seen nothing until Watson stepped out from behind the wall. He would not have reached the button (and thus it would also be harder to push the button really fast and 'run'). An approach from “XX” would have exposed Watson to Steven Parent’s lights well before he reached the car.
Car location #4 assumes Watson intercepted Parent before he reached the button by an alternative route. This second route was chosen because it is as close as Parent can be to the retaining wall, bushes and trees along the drive to the right. The image from Cielodrive.com shows there were garbage cans and other debre (a wagon wheel?) lined and piled up behind the wall along that side of the drive. These are also visible in the diagram. The witnesses do not mention these items or climbing through or around them in their testimony. This suggests they were not in area “XX”.
Location #4 is actually close to where Steven Parent's Rambler was found the next morning. Given location #4 is also blocked from view from the street by the wall it is unlikely this was the route Steven Parent took if the killers (or Watson) did, in fact, push the car back up the drive and behind the wall out of sight where it came to rest. They wouldn’t have had to do that if he approached by this route. The configuration of the car’s wheels could suggest someone pushed the car and turned the wheels sharply to the left to steer it back behind the wall.
Under any scenario, there is, however, no location where Atkins and Kasabian could have been within 'a few feet' of Watson and actually observed the murder of Steven Parent from cover. To be within a few feet they have to be standing or crouching right next to Watson at either “A” or “B”.
The logical place for Atkins, Kasabian and Krenwinkel to have been located is either behind the wall at “X” or up on the embankment “XXX”. The problem with both of these locations is you likely can’t see the confrontation from either location, if you are crouching or ‘sitting down’, especially at night.
Between “XXX” and “X” I believe the better location is at “X”-behind the wall. At “XXX” they would not have seen Steven Parent’s car, especially at night. They also may not have been able to hear anything spoken unless one or both participants spoke loudly. Steven Parent, at least, did not, by witness testimony.
Conversely, if the three murderesses were sitting or crouched down near “X” and Watson confronted Steven Parent at “A” (car location #3) they still would not have been able to see him attack Steven Parent with a knife or stick the gun in the window and fire four times. At “X” they likely would have heard a good deal but would have seen very little.
……which is precisely what one of our two witnesses claimed.
Kasabian places herself within ‘a few feet’ of Watson and actually sees the attack. Even thenher testimony is not accurate. She doesn’t see the knife blow.
-----
First Tate Homocide Investigation Progress Report:
“*****
Officers noted that the split-rail fence which runs to the north of the garage area was broken, and that scrape marks appeared, on the curb directly in front of the split-rail fence. The scrape marks and the break in the split-rail fence appeared fresh. A search of the undercarriage of Parent's car revealed similar scrape marks and concrete transfer. The rear bumper of the car also showed white paint transfer similar to that as on the split-rail fence.
*****
The second theory is that as Parent left the Garretson residence he observed either part or all of the above-described crimes. He ran for his car, which was parked somewhere in the paved parking area of the property. He entered the car, backed it up at a high rate of speed, struck the curb and knocked down the split-rail fence previously described. He then turned the car in a westerly direction, and in an attempt to evade his pursuers turned the car at an odd angle toward the gate. At this point, he was caught and killed.”
Others have explained the fence by assuming Steven Parent was either a little tipsy from his one beer or just careless and backed into the fence while leaving. I even read one comment somewhere where the author suggested Steven and Garretson must have smoked some pot together. You can’t, however, explain the fence with just this assumtion. You have to make other assumptions.
You have to assume Steven Parent decided not to go back and tell Garretson. You have to assume this happened either because Steven figured either he’d never see him again or that Steven would call him the next day and explain. But he’s 100’ feet away. Why not just stroll on back and fess up?
You also have to assume Steven failed to tell the people in the house because he wanted to avoid a confrontation or was intimidated like any teenager. This one I can buy and clearly he didn’t because no one was ‘alert’ when Watson entered the home.
There is another possibility but it also requires a lot of assumptions. If Steven’s car was parked at either location #1 or #6 and he was attacked while starting his car and trying to escape (by someone wielding a knife) it may have happened exactly like the Homocide Report states. But again, you have to make assumptions. Neither witness describes the attack on Steven Parent happening this way and no one subsequent to the trials did either. It is an intriguing idea, however-especially given the blood evidence- Watson runs out of the house to help someone stop Steven Parent from getting away, everyone counts heads and makes a dash for the doors when the guy with the gun is gone. This scenario does make the use of the gun, contrary to Manson's orders more of a panic situation. But this scenario has to assume everything in the official narrative is wrong. Atkins lied and Kasabian simply parroted Atkins. As we will see, the later part of this assumption is possible.
Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.
The fence, to me remains a mystery. I see no simple explanation that does not involve a host of assumptions.
This video is from September 1969
