Danny DeCarlo Trial Testimony - Sept. 11/70. AM Session Nov 4, 2015 22:31:44 GMT -5
Post by Christine on Nov 4, 2015 22:31:44 GMT -5
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
HON. CHARLES H. OLDER, JUDGE
Vol.87 - CASE #A253156
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Plaintiff
CHARLES MANSON, SUSAN ATKINS,
LESLIE VAN HOUTEN, PATRICIA KRENWINKEL, Defendants
DATE: Friday, September 11, 1970.
Los Angeles, California, 9:52 am
THE COURT: All parties, counsel and jurors are present. Did you have something, Mr. Kanarek?
MR.KANAREK: Yes. May we approach the bench, your Honor?
THE COURT: Very well.
*****(The following proceedings were had at the bench out of the hearing of the jury.)*****
MR.KANAREK: In what appears to be, your Honor, a Probation Officer's report to the Juvenile Court ---
THE COURT: What is the subject we are on, Mr. Kanarek?
MR.KANAREK: Mr. Hendricks, your Honor. I gather Mr. Bugliosi is going to call Mr. Hendricks?
MR.BUGLIOSI: Didn't you indicate that you wanted us to put off the calling of Hendricks for some reason? I was going to call him yesterday.
THE COURT: No, Mr. Kanarek and the other counsel wanted to look at the file.
MR.BUGLIOSI: That was earlier in the day. Then I thought later in the day after they had looked at the file ---
THE COURT: Mr. Kanarek indicates he had not completed looking at the file yesterday.
MR.BUGLIOSI: Have you completed looking at the file?
MR.KANAREK: Only in the sense, as much as I can, not being a psychiatrist, your Honor, but if Mr. Bugliosi is not going to call Mr. Hendricks ---
MR.BUGLIOSI: I am, but not right now. I am going to call Danny DeCarlo.
THE COURT: Let's get to the point, Mr. Kanarek.
MR.KANAREK: Mr. Bugliosi interjected his statement. What I'm saying is this, your Honor, I am referring to the probation department report, and it states in this report his criminal behavior would seem to be complicated by an obvious organic problem with his brain that has never been researched thoroughly prior to this time.
This file will reflect that there has been no "thorough research on his brain" subject to this February 1970, report ---
I have spoken with Dr. A.R. Tweed, and I can make the offer of proof, Dr. A.R. Tweed dictated this to me over the telephone this morning, and it is very close --- and this is the offer of proof:
That if he were called to testify, based upon the minimal --- I told him ---
THE COURT: He made a diagnosis over the telephone!
MR.KANAREK: No, but because of the exigencies of time I'm asking your Honor to appoint doctors.
THE COURT: You are going to have to show me some reason for it, Mr. Kanarek.
MR.KANAREK: That is what I am trying to do.
Dr. Tweed says --- as a bare minimum, the entire record, meaning this Youth Authority file of Mr. Hendricks, should be reviewed and studied by psychiatrists before any comment could be made concerning the competency or lack of competency as to Mr. Hendricks.
This statement of Mr. Tweed's was made in response to my questioning the doctor, and after I pointed out matters concerning, for instance, in this report there are statements that Mr. Hendricks has seen little men sitting on the edge of his bed speaking to him, and the fact that he slashed his wrists and watched the blood, his own blood, drip into the sink.
THE COURT: If you are talking about something in the file now, Mr. Kanarek, I want to read it for myself. I don't want it second hand.
MR.KANAREK: Right. What I am saying, your Honor, is that Dr. Tweed says ---
THE COURT: I am not interested in what Dr. Tweed says. He has never examined the man.
THE COURT: Then I couldn't be concerned with Dr. Tweed. Now, let's get down to the point. Do you have something in the file?
MR.KANAREK: Yes. What I just read to you about the obvious ---
THE COURT: Do you have any objection to my reading the file?
MR.KANAREK: No, I have no objection to your Honor reading the entire file.
THE COURT: I will do that and take the matter up a little later.
MR.BUGLIOSI: With respect to Danny DeCarlo, again we are going to go into the relationship of the members of the Family and Mr. Manson, things like that, which, under the Stevens case, goes toward the issue of conspiracy, the same as we did with Linda Kasabian.
THE COURT: That will be offered as part of the circumstantial evidence?
MR.BUGLIOSI: Yes. The relationship and association, one with the other, and also several other things. Now --- I am sorry.
THE COURT: You contend that it is part of the circumstantial evidence tending to show a conspiracy; is that correct?
MR.BUGLIOSI: Yes, tending to show a conspiracy, and circumstantial evidence showing that these people were very close to each other, and the interrelationship that they had with each other, that Manson had with the girls and the men in the Family.
Of course, I will be calling 8 or 9 witnesses to the stand for the same type of evidence. The only one I think we have called thus far is Linda Kasabian. Now Danny DeCarlo will testify to that and, of course, many other things, including the gun and the rope and things like that.
I believe he will testify that he was a member of the Family, and he made observations.
MR.HUGHES: Is it my understanding that you will be calling him against Leslie Van Houten also in this instance, or partly?
MR.BUGLIOSI: Yes. It has to be against Leslie Van Houten as to the conspiracy count. Not as to the 5 murders, but as to the conspiracy count. I think his testimony has to come in against her because she is charged with a conspiracy. In fact, she will be mentioned in his testimony in regard to the Family.
THE COURT: We don't have to go into all this on the record. You can confer with counsel. Are you going to leave the Hendricks file with me, Mr. Kanarek?
MR.KANAREK: Certainly. Thank you.
THE COURT: All right.
*****(Whereupon all counsel return to their places at the counsel table and the following proceedings occur in open court within the presence and hearing of the jury.)*****