LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, MONDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1969,
9:35 O'CLOCK A.M.
-oOo-

MR. STOVITZ: We will call, Officer McGann.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS: Officer McGann.

THE FOREMAN: Will you state your full name; please:

THE WITNESS: Michael McGann, M-c-G-a-n-n.

THE FOREMAN: Will you raise your right hand and take the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter now pending before the Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE WITNESS: I do.

THE FOREMAN: Would you please be seated.

Q: Now what is your occupation and assignment; please?

A: I am sergeant of police for the City of Los Angeles, presently assigned to the Robbery-Homicide Divisions.

Q: Are you one of the chief investigating officers in the Tate homicides?

A: Yes, I am.

Q: As such, on the date of August 9, 1969, did you proceed to the Roman Polanski residence at 10050 Cielo Drive in. West Los Angeles?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: What time did you arrive there?

A: Approximately 1:30 p.m.

Q: Would you tell the Grand Jury what you observed upon arriving at the Polanski residence.

A: We arrived at the residence. I approached the driveway -- could I just point to it, point to the house?

Q: Yes, this diagram is Grand Jury Exhibit No. 7.

A: We approached the residence. It is protected by a gate here with an electronic opener and it is opened by pushing a button here which activates the gate and the gate then opens.

I also noticed a power pole and wires had been severed and the wires were hanging over the fence here, which does not open the gate.

Q: You say "wires," how many wires?

A: Two wires.

Q: What type of wires?

A: One was a telephone wire and another was an electric wire that at one time had been used to communicate with the house. The wires went over the garage and over the house and were right here by a window. They apparently had been used in the past years to communicate with people that would stop here at the gate, buzz this, and then they in turn would allow the gate to be opened, but this was no longer in use.

Q: When someone buzzed at the gate this communication wire notified the people inside the residence?

A: That's right.

Q: Of someone at the gate?

A: Yes.

Q: In addition to the communication wire, you saw one telephone wire, also?

A: Yes.

Q: So, two wires were cut?

A: Yes.

Q: Where were both wires when you reached the residence?

A: The wires were here out over the gate -- here over the fence.

Q: Hanging over the fence?

A: Right.

Q: You may continue.

A: I then entered the property and observed Steven Parent slumped over the seat of this Rambler, which is this two-door.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 10.

Do you know what is in that photograph?

A: This is a picture which depicts the position of Steven Parent at the time I arrived on the scene.

Q: Does this photograph appear to be an accurate representation of the way Steven Parent looked when you observed him behind the driver's seat in his vehicle?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: I show you Exhibit No. 9.

Do you know that is in that photograph?

A: This is the vehicle of Steven Parent as it appeared when I arrived on the scene.

Q: Just hold it for a second, Sergeant.

I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 22.

Do you know who is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, this is Steven Parent.

Q: Does the Steven Parent shown in this photograph, Grand Jury Exhibit No. 22, appear to be the same person whom you saw slumped behind the driver's seat of a vehicle as depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit No. 10?

A: Yes, one and the same.

Q: You may continue.

A: I continued onto the property, entered the walkway, and at this time I observed Wojiciech Frykowski lying on the front lawn on his side.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have a photograph of a male Caucasian lying on the lawn.

May this be marked Grand Jury Exhibit No. 25 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 25 for identification.

Do you know what is shown on that photograph?

A: Yes, this is the way that Wojiciech Frykowski appeared on August the 9th when I entered the property.

Q: Is that a fair and accurate representation is of the way he looked when you saw him at the Polanski residence?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 21, a photograph previously identified as being a Coroner's photo of Wojiciech Frykowski.

Do you recognize the person in that photograph as Wojiciech Frykowski?

A: Yes, they are one and the same.

Q: Does the person depicted in that photograph, Wojiciech Frykowski, appear to be the same person who is depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit No. 25?

A: Yes, they are the same.

Q: You may continue.

A: I continued toward Frykowski's body, at which time observed Abigail Folger lying on her back at this point here.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here a photograph of a female Caucasian lying on the lawn.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit No. 26 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 26 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: This is a photograph of Abigail Folger as she appeared on August 9th.

Q: Is it a fair and accurate representation of the way she appeared when you saw her?

A: Yes, it is

Q: I show you a photograph, Grand Jury Exhibit No. 20, previously identified as being a Coroner's photograph of Abigail Folger.

Does the photograph of Abigail Folger appear -- on, does the person depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit No. 20, previously identified as Abigail Folger, appear to be the same woman whom you identified in Grand Jury Exhibit No. 26?

A: Yes, they are one and the same.

Q: You may continue.

A: I went back to the front of the house, at which time I observed numerous blood splatters about the front porch and on the front door.

The word -- the door was partially open and "Pig," or, "P-i-g" was written in blood on the front door.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 14.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, the word "Pig," or, "P-i-g" is written in blood.

Q: Does this photograph appear to be a fair and accurate representation of what is shown therein?

A: Yes, It does.

Q: You may continue.

A: I then entered the entryway and continued into the living room of the Polanski residence.

I continued over to this couch in this area here and I observed Sharon Polanski lying on her left side directly in front of the sofa.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here another photograph of a female Caucasian lying on what appears to be the living room floor.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit No. 27 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 27 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, this is a picture of Sharon Polanski as I observed her on that date.

Q: Does it appear to be a fair and accurate representation of what is depicted therein?

A: Yes, it does.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 23, a Coroner's photograph of a female Caucasian, previously identified as Sharon Marie Polanski,

Have you seen that photograph before?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: Does the Sharon Polanski depicted in that photograph, Grand Jury Exhibit No. 23, appear to be the same individual depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit No. 27?

A: Yes, they are one and the same.

Q: You may continue.

A: I, also, from this position, observed the body of Jay Sebring lying on his right side in this position in front of a chair.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here another photograph of a male Caucasian lying on what appears to be the living room floor.

May this be marked Grand Jury Exhibit No. 28 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked,

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 28 for identification,

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, this is a picture of Jay Sebring as I observed him on August 9th.

Q: Does it appear to be a fair and accurate representation of the way Jay Sebring looked when you observed him lying on the living room floor?

A: Yes, it does.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 24, a Coroner's photograph, an individual previously identified as Jay Sebring.

Have you seen that photograph before?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: The person depicted in that photograph, Jay Sebring, does he appear to be the same individual depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit No. 28 for identification?

A: Yes, they are one and the same.

Q: When you arrived at the residence did the individuals whom you have just identified, Steven Parent, Abigail Folger, Sharon Polanski, Jay Sebring and Wojiciech Frykowski appear to be dead at that time?

A: Yes, they did.

Q: Incidentally, were these photographs I have shown you just now taken under your direction?

A: Yes, they were.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 8 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, this is the Polanski home at 10050 Cielo Drive.

Q: Directing your attention to a door here of the residence, do you know what door that is to the residence?

A: Yes, that is the door that the word "Pig" was written on.

Q: Is that the front door of the residence?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: Directing your attention to a window to the right of the door, was that window open when you arrived at the Polanski residence?

A: When I arrived at the residence the window was open and the screen was sitting beside it leaning against the window just as it is in this photograph.

MR. BUGLIOSI: I have another photograph here, Mr. Foreman.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit 29 for identification?

It appears to be a closeup view of the window about which the witness has just testified.

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 29 for identification?

Is that a closeup view of the window that you have just testified to?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: Directing your attention to the screen, did you look closely at that screen that was at the residence?

A: Yes.

Q: Was it damaged in any fashion?

A: A vertical slit was made in the screen.

Q: As a part of your investigation did you or your officers under your direction search the premises, including the interior of the house and the vicinity of Steven Parent's car for shell casings?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: What is a shell casing?

A: A shell casing would be that portion of a bullet which would remain in the revolver if it were a revolver or it would be ejected in the case of an automatic.

A shell casing is that which contains the bullet and the primer and the powder.

Q: Did you find any shell casings?

A: No shell casings either by Parent's vehicle or inside the residence or on the property itself.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Could I have a moment?

THE FOREMAN: Surely.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here a photograph of a knife.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit No. 30 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may so marked.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 30 for identification, Sergeant.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, the buck knife is shown along with a scabbard, I suppose you would call it.

Q: Did you observe this buck knife on the premises?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: Where did you observe it?

A: It was wedged between the lower seat cushion and the back of an overstuffed chair located right here.

Q: In the living room of the Polanski residence?

A: Yes.

Q: Did it have any blood on it at all?

A: No blood on the weapon.

Q: What did you identify as being at the bottom of this photograph?

A: This is a scabbard or a holder for some type of knife.

Q: A container for the knife?

A: Yes.

Q: Where did you find this scabbard?

A: This was not found by me, this was found at a later time.

Q: Inside the residence?

A: No.

Q BY MR. STOVITZ: A question has been asked by one the Grand Jurors about the approximate length of the knife, including the handle.

Perhaps the witness can clarify that.

A: If you have a ruler.

Q: Can you give an approximation?

A: The weapon has a blade length of 6-3/8's inches and the total length is 14-3/4's.

Q: Did you observe any slashes in the overstuffed chair where the knife was found, the previous exhibit, No. 30?

A: No, no slashes in the chair.

Q: Did you make any determination whether the interior of the house had been ransacked?

A: The interior of the house did not appear to have been ransacked.

However, things were disarranged within the house itself but I would not say that there was ransacking.

However, the wallets of Abigail Folger and Wojiciech Frykowski were loosely found in one of the sofa in the Folger bedroom but they did not appear to -- the house itself did not appear to have been ransacked.

Q: Did you observe any radio or TV or television wires inside the residence having been cut?

A: No, no wires inside the residence had been cut.

Q: Were the lights inside the residence in operating order when you arrived?

A: Yes, they were.

Q: Was there any other -- was any currency found inside Abigail Folger's wallet?

A: Yes, there was currency inside the wallet. However, I don't remember the exact amount.

Q: What about Wojiciech Frykowski's wallet?

A: I don't recall if there was currency in the wallet or not.

MR. STOVITZ: No further question.

THE FOREMAN: Is that all the questions that the members of the Grand Jury have?

You are admonished not to discuss or impart at any time outside of this Jury Room the questions that have been asked of you in regard to this matter, or your answers, until authorized by this Grand Jury or the Court to discuss or impart such matters.

You may be excused.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

MR. STOVITZ: Mr. Escalante.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS: Mr. Escalante.

THE FOREMAN: Will you state your full name; please.

THE WITNESS: Frank R. Escalante, E-s-c-a-l-a-n-t-e.

THE FOREMAN: Will you raise your right hand and take the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter now pending before the Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE WITNESS: I do.

THE FOREMAN: Will you please be seated.

Q: Would you state and spell your name, again, sir, for the Grand Jury?

A: Frank R. Escalante, E-s-c-a-l-a-n-t-e.

Q: What is your occupation and assignment; sir?

A: I am a police officer for the City of Los Angeles, assigned to the Valley Services Division Jail in Van Nuys.

Q: Were you assigned to the Valley Services Division Jail on April 23, 1969?

A: Yes, I was.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 4.

Do you know who is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Who is that?

A: That is Watson.

Q: What is his first name; if you know?

A: My mind is blank right now.

Q: Does the name Charles ring a bell?

A: Yes, sir, Charles Watson.

Q: Did you see Mr. Charles Watson on the date of April 23, 1969?

A: Yes.

Q: Where did you see him at that time?

A: At Valley Services Jail.

Q: Was he in custody at that time?

A: Yes, he was.

Q: Among your duties at the Valley Services Division Jail did you roll fingerprints?

A: Yes.

Q: How do you roll a fingerprint?

A: You take each finger individually and use a special ink and you transfer the finger after you roll it in the ink onto a -- what is called an FBI card, which is an exemplar of the fingerprint that you have taken.

Q: Did you roll Mr. Watson's fingerprints on April 23, 1969, at the Valley Services Division Jail?

A: Yes, I did.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here what appears to be a Xerox copy of some fingerprints.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31 for identification.

Do you know what is shown -- strike that

Do you know what Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31 is?

A: Yes, I do.

Q: What is it?

A: It is an exemplar of a fingerprint card.

Q: An exemplar of a fingerprint card or a copy of an exemplar of fingerprints?

A: Yes, it is

Q: Do you know whose fingerprints are on Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31?

A: This is Charles Watson's fingerprints.

Q: Did you personally roll Charles Watson's fingerprints on that day?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: This is a Xerox copy; is that correct?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: Did you personally observe Mr. Watson's fingerprints being rolled onto that exhibit?

A: Yes, I did, sir.

MR. BUGLIOSI: No further questions.

THE FOREMAN: Are there any questions that any members of the Grand Jury would like to ask the witness?

You are admonished not to discuss or impart at any time outside of this Jury Room the questions that have been asked of you in regard to this matter, or your answers until authorized by this Grand Jury or the Court to discuss or impart such matters.

You may be excused.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

MR. STOVITZ: Jerrome Boen.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS: Jerrome Boen.

THE FOREMAN: Will you state your name; please.

THE WITNESS: Jerrome A. Boen, B-o-e-n.

THE FOREMAN: Will you raise your right hand and take the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter now pending before the Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE WITNESS: I do.

THE FOREMAN: Will you please be seated.

Q: Would you state and spell your name, again, sir.

A: Jerrome A. Boen. J-e-r-r-o-m-e B-o-e-n.

Q: What is your occupation and assignment; sir?

A: I am a police officer for the City of Los Angeles, assigned to the Scientific Investigation Division, the Latent Fingerprint Section.

Q: Please relate your training and experience in the field of latent fingerprints.

A: Prior to going into the Fingerprint Section I completed a course in fingerprints through the East Los Angeles Junior College.

After entering the Fingerprint Section I received in excess of 150 hours of individual instruction from in excess of 12 individual qualified fingerprint experts.

I have conducted in excess of 3,000 field investigation on fingerprints.

I have compared in excess of 100,000 fingerprints and I have testified and qualified in Federal, Municipal, Superior and Juvenile Courts in excess of 100 times.

Q: You say you have qualified in court. Did you qualify as an expert in the field of latent fingerprint?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: What is a latent fingerprint?

A: On the hands and feet are what is known as friction ridges that form different patterns. Along these friction ridges are located pores where there is a secretion of fluid, normally, all the time.

When an object is touched the impression left is an impression of the friction ridges. Normally this is invisible to the naked eye, and, therefore, it is called a latent print or a hidden print.

Q: What does the term lift a latent fingerprint mean?

A: To lift a latent print is referred to you develop a latent print, normally, with powder and then to lift it you use a clear adhesive-type fingerprint tape and press this over the impression lifting it up. It adheres to the powder and when you lift it up you place it on a card that has a different color background so it can be seen.

Q: You later photograph that card?

A: Yes, it is later photographed.

Q: On the date, August 9, 1969, did you go to Roman Polanski's residence located at 10050 Cielo Drive in West Los Angeles?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: Did you go there for the purpose of attempting to secure some latent fingerprints at the crime scene?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: About what time did you arrive at the residence?

A: I would say it was approximately noon.

Q: Did you, in fact, secure any latent fingerprints at the crime scene?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you secure any latent fingerprints from the outside of the front door of the Roman Polanski residence?

A: Yes, I did.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here what appears to be a photograph of a fingerprint.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit No. 32 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 32 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: What is shown in that photograph?

A: This is the photograph of the prints that I lifted off of the front door.

Q: At the Roman Polanski residence?

A: Yes.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 14 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, that appears to be the door of the -- front door of the Polanski home.

Q: Is this the front door depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit No. 14, is this the front door from which you lifted the fingerprint which is shown in Grand Jury Exhibit No. 32 for identification?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: Looking at this photograph of the front door could you make an "X" at the exact point where you lifted the fingerprint.

Could you make that a square rather than an "X"?

A: Yes, this would be approximately -- it was to the left of the door knob and above the door knob approximately, say, six, seven or eight inches.

Do you want a square, you say?

Q: Yes, just a square.

A: It would be in this area here.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, may the record reflect that I am drawing an arrow from the square and inserting the word latent, "FP," for latent fingerprint.

THE FOREMAN: It may so reflect.

MR. STOVITZ: That is Grand Jury Exhibit what; Counsel?

MR. BUGLIOSI: Grand Jury Exhibit 14 for identification.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31 for identification.

Have you ever seen that Xerox copy of fingerprints before?

A: I don't believe I have seen this before, Counsel.

Q: Have you ever seen the fingerprints appearing on Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31 for identification before?

A: This particular print that is on this paper, Counsel?

Q: I am not referring to the particular piece of paper, I am referring to the prints which appear on this piece of paper.

Have you ever seen those prints before?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: When did you see these prints?

A: I saw them on another card at the Latent Fingerprint Office.

Q: And this appears to be a Xerox copy of those prints which you saw on the card?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you ever compare the prints which you saw on the card, and this appears to be a Xerox copy of this Grand Jury Exhibit 31, with the latent fingerprints which appear on Grand Jury Exhibit 32 for identification?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: When did you make that comparison?

A: It was in the Latent Fingerprint Office.

I don't recall exactly what date it was.

Q: What is the approximate date?

A: I would say a couple of weeks ago.

Q: As a result of your comparison did you form any opinion?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: What opinion did you form?

A: The fingerprint appearing in 32 and the fingerprint appearing on the Xerox copy of this located in the box marked fourth ring finger were made by one and the same person.

Q: So, you compared the fingerprints which appeared on a card, and these fingerprints now appear on Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31, this is a Xerox copy of those prints, you compared that exemplar with the latent fingerprint; is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: You formed the opinion that the latent fingerprint and the exemplar belong to one and the same person; is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you know, as a fingerprint expert, has there ever been a purported case of two people having the same identical fingerprints?

A: No, sir.

Q: In the comparison of latent fingerprints with fingerprint exemplars what does the term points of identity mean to you?

A: Points of identity refer to the characteristics of the friction ridges.

Q: How are these points of identity used in comparing latent fingerprints with exemplar cards?

A: The points of identity or the characteristics of the friction ridges are matched against each other to see if they are the same.

Q: How many points of identity do fingerprint experts in the Los Angeles Police Department require before they will get an unqualified opinion in a court of law?

A: The policy set by our section is ten points for court purposes.

MR. BUGLIOSI: No further questions.

THE FOREMAN: Are there any questions that any member of the Grand Jury would like to ask the witness?

Q BY MR. STOVITZ: Sir, were there any other unknown identifiable fingerprints found at the scene?

A: Yes, there were.

Q: And are those prints on file with the Los Angeles Police Department?

A: Yes, they are.

Q: And as you get the exemplars of fingerprints, such as Exhibit 31 which is a known set of fingerprints, do you compare them with the unknown that you found at the scene?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Now, did you personally check the wallets of the people that were found at the scene?

A: No, sir, I did not.

Q: Was there another fingerprint man there that was checking the wallets?

A: Yes, there were several other fingerprint men at the scene.

MR. STOVITZ: No further questions.

THE FOREMAN: You are admonished not to discuss or impart at any time outside of this Jury Room the questions that have been asked of you in regard to this matter, or your answers, until authorized by this Grand Jury or the Court to discuss or impart such matters.

You may be excused.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Dolan.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS: Mr. Dolan.

THE FOREMAN: Will you state your full name; please

THE WITNESS: Harold J. Dolan, D-o-l-a-n.

THE FOREMAN: Will you raise your right hand and take the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter now pending before the Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE WITNESS: I do.

THE FOREMAN: Will you please be seated.

Q: What is your occupation and assignment; sir?

A: I am a police officer for the City of Los Angeles, assigned to the Scientific Investigation Division, Latent Fingerprint Section.

Q: What is your training and experience in the field of latent fingerprints?

A: I have been assigned to the Latent Fingerprint Section for approximately six years, during which time I have attended a course at East Los Angeles in fingerprints.

I have studied under acknowledged experts in the field such as Bill Walmsley and Dean Bergman.

I have testified in court approximately 250 times, that is both Municipal and Superior Courts here in Los Angeles.

I have made in excess of 300,000 comparisons in fingerprints and I have made in excess of 6,000 investigations for the finding of latent fingerprints.

Q: Do you qualify as an expert in a court of law in the field of latent fingerprints?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31 for identification.

Do you know what is shown on that Grand Jury Exhibit.

A: Yes, sir.

Q: What is shown there?

A: These are the fingerprints, exemplar card, that I compared on November the 30th and again this morning before coming over here.

Q: Where did you get that exemplar card?

A: From the police files at the request of homicide detectives.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 32 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, this is a photograph of latent fingerprints.

Q: Did you ever make a comparison of the fingerprint exemplar, Grand Jury Exhibit 31, with the latent fingerprints in Exhibit No. 32 for identification?

A: Yes, I did, sir.

Q: When did you make that comparison?

A: On November 30th and once again this morning at the Police Building.

Q: Did you form any opinion as a result of that comparison?

A: I did, sir.

Q: What opinion did you form?

A: That the fingerprint appearing on -- latent fingerprint appearing on People's 32 in the upper right-hand corner adjacent to the number 32 is one and the same as the fingerprint appearing in the right ring box on People's No. 31.

Q: Would you indicate where the right ring box is, sir, in Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31.

A: That would be box No. 4, the second from the right.

Q: Would you please make a square out of that particular box with the black pencil.

A: Yes.

Q: You compared the exemplar which is in box No. 4 on Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31 with the fingerprint to the -- farthest to the right in Grand Jury Exhibit No, 32; is that correct?

A: That's right, sir.

Q: You observed three fingerprints in Grand Jury Exhibit 32; is that correct?.

A: Yes.

Q: You only made a comparison with that fingerprint which is farthest to the right on Grand Jury Exhibit No. 32?

A: Yes.

Q: How many points of identification did you find between the exemplar and the latent fingerprint?

A: Sixteen.

Q: How many points are normally required by fingerprint experts in the Los Angeles Police Department before they will give an unqualified opinion in court?

A: I would say ten, sir.

Q: Grand Jury Exhibit No. 31, does this appear to be a Xerox copy of the original exemplar?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: When you made your comparison were you working with the original exemplar or with this Xerox copy?

A: I worked with both the original exemplar and the Xerox copy.

MR. BUGLIOSI: No further questions,

THE FOREMAN: Are there any members of the Grand Jury that have a question they would like to ask the witness?

BY MR. BUGLIOSI: Directing your attention, once again, to Grand Jury Exhibit 32 for identification, you recall that there are three prints on Grand Jury Exhibit 32.

You compared the one furthest to the right; is that correct?

A: That's right.

Q: What about the other two fingerprints? Did you have an opportunity to compare those two fingerprints with any of the fingerprints on the exemplar?

A: Yes, I did, sir.

Q: Were you able to do so?

A: No, they did not match up.

Q: Did the two other prints on Grand Jury Exhibit 32 for identification match up with any other known prints --

A: No, sir.

Q: -- found at the scene?

A: No, sir.

Q: Or anywhere else?

A: No, sir.

MR. BUGLIOSI: No further questions.

THE FOREMAN: You are admonished not to discuss or impart at any time outside of this Jury Room the questions that have been asked of you in regard to this matter, or your answers, until authorized by this Grand Jury or the Court to discuss or impart such matters.

You may be excused.

THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Lee

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS: Mr. Lee.

THE FOREMAN: Will you state your full name; please.

THE WITNESS: William J Lee, L-e-e.

THE FOREMAN: Will you raise your right hand and take the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter now pending before the Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE WITNESS: I do.

THE FOREMAN: Would you please be seated.

Q: What is your occupation and assignment; sir?

A: I'm a police officer for the City of Los Angeles, assigned to the Scientific Investigation Division, Firearms and Explosives Unit.

Q: What is your training and experience in the field of firearms identification?

A: During World War II I was a rifleman, an automatic rifleman in the United States infantry.

Since that time I have -- or, during that time I was instructed and had experience in the use of hand, shoulder and automatic weapons and explosives.

Since that time I was appointed police officer and I got additional training in firearms.

I went to school at the major gun factories in the East which include Colt, Smith & Wesson, High Standard, Remington and Winchester.

I studied the manufacture of explosives at DuPont Company at Karney Point, New Jersey.

I have been in the Crime Laboratory Firearms Section -- originally in the Firearms Section in 1955 through 1960, and then again in 1965, I believe February '65, I returned as head of that section.

I studied bullets which have been fired from different types of weapons. The weapons themselves.

I have studied the markings that are made on shell casings and bullets by these said weapons.

I have testified in Municipal and Superior Courts in the County of Los Angeles and other counties in the state and before the Grand Jury.

I have testified as an expert witness approximately 400 times.

I am a member of the California Association of Criminalists and I am an instructor in police science at El Camino College.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here a photograph of what appears to be three pieces of a grip to a firearm.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit No. 33 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 33 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: I do.

Q: What is shown in that photograph?

A: This is the right gunstock from a revolver.

Q: What do you mean by the gun stock?

A: On this particular type of firearm there are two pieces of wood called one pair of grips.

This is the piece of the weapon that is held in the hand, or, it is the wooden handle of a gun.

Q: Did you ever physically observe the three pieces of grip which are shown in this photograph?

A: I have.

Q: When did you first observe those three pieces of grip?

A: I first observed the three pieces of grip on 8/14/69, in the afternoon.

Q: Where was that?

A: At the Crime Laboratory.

Q: Who had the three pieces of grip at that time?

A: Manuel J. Granado.

Q: Did he turn those three pieces of grip over to you?

A: He did.

Q: These are the three pieces that are depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit 33; is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: Did you ever examine these three pieces of grip depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit 33 for identification?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you attempt to physically mate the three pieces of grip?

A: I did.

Q: Were you successful in mating them?

A: It is my opinion they are all three from one and the same grip.

Q: What do the three pieces form when you mated them?

A: One complete half of a pair of gun stocks

Q: Do you know what half?

A: It is the right half. It is the right stock

Q: From your examination of the right half of the grip were you able to determine the manufacturer of the firearm to which the grip belonged?

A: Yes.

Q: And who is that?

A: High Standard Manufacturing Company.

Q: They manufacture quite a few firearms?

A: They do.

Q: Different models, too?

A: Yes.

Q: Were you able to determine the model of High Standard firearm to which these three pieces of grip belonged?

A: Yes.

Q: You yourself were able to determine that?

A: I observed the same grips on a particular type of weapon.

Q: At the point where you did determine that it was a High Standard firearm to which tb grips belonged you did not know at that point the particular model; is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: What did you do to ascertain the type or particular model to which the grip belonged?

A: I had a telephonic communication and eventually I met personally with Mr. Ed Ldmax of Leisure Guns, which controls High Standard Manufacturing Company.

Q: Where did you meet him?

A: At his office at approximately Fifth and Figueroa Street in the Union Bank Building.

Q: You brought the three pieces of grip over to him?

A: As I recall, yes.

Q: For the purpose of his ascertaining the particular model of High Standard to which the grips belonged?

A: Yes.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here another photograph. It appears to be a hand grip to a weapon.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit 34 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: In the previous exhibit, Grand jury Exhibit. 33 for identification, you recall that the three pieces had not been mated; is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: You were able to mate them together; is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: When they were mated together did they form what appears to be in Grand Jury Exhibit 34 for identification?

A: Yes, that is correct.

Q: On August the 10th, 1969, Mr. Lee, did you get three bullets from Dr. Herrera, a Deputy Medical Examiner for the Coroner's Office?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: Do you have these three bullets with you today?

A: I do.

MR. BUGLIOSI: May I see them?

Mr. Foreman, I have here a small manila envelope containing a bullet which appears to be damaged and on the manila envelope it says 8-10-69, 12:45 signed, Dr. Herrera, and also there is a name Wojiciech Frykowski.

May the envelope and the bullet be collectively marked Grand Jury Exhibit 35 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 35 for identification.

I direct your attention to the bullet contained therein.

Have you ever seen that bullet before?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: Is this one of the bullets you got from Dr. Herrera on August the 10th, 1969?

A: It is.

Q: Directing your attention to the reverse side of the envelope, do you see your signature on that envelope?

A: I do.

Q: It is "L-e-e"?

A: Yes.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here two other envelopes, manila envelopes.

One of them contains a bullet. The other one also contains a damaged bullet.

On both of the envelopes there is a name Steven E. Parent, dated August the 10th, 1969, signed Dr. Herrera.

May these two envelopes and the two bullets be collectively marked Grand Jury Exhibit 36 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: They may be so marked.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 36 for identification and ask you to look at the contents of the two envelopes.

Have you seen those contents before?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: Have you seen the bullets in each envelope?

A: Yes.

Q: Are these the two remains of bullets which you received from Dr. Herrera on August the 10th, 1969?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Also directing your attention to the reverse side of the two envelopes, is it your signature on the reverse side of both envelopes?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: On the date August 11, 1969, did you receive a bullet from Dr. Noguchi, the Coroner of Los Angeles?

A: I did.

Q: Do you have that bullet with you?

A: I do.

MR. BUGLIOSI: I have here another envelope, Mr. Foreman, containing a damaged bullet.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit 37 for identification?

THE FOREMAN: it may be so marked.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: For further identification on the envelope it says, "Jay Sebring. This bullet is recovered between his shirt and back found loosely during fluoroscope examination at 10:15 a.m. on August 10, 1969."

I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 37 for identification and direct your attention to the bullet found inside the envelope.

Have you seen that bullet before?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: Is this the bullet that you received from Dr. Noguchi on August 11, 1969?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: Is that your signature on the reverse side of the manila envelope?

A: It is.

Q: Did you examine these four bullets to determine the caliber of the weapon from which they were fired?.

A: Yes.

Q: And what examination did you conduct to determine that?

A: First of all, I made a visual examination and through my experience I formed the opinion that they were .22 caliber and I used a microscope which has a filar micrometer eyepiece and I am able to measure the width of lands and grooves which are On the circumference of the bullet.

I measured these and computed them and was able to determine that the diameter was approximately .22 caliber.

Q: For the Grand Jury, what is a shell casing?

A: The shell casing is one of the component parts of a cartridge and normally it is the brass shell casing which contains the powder and you can normally observe the bullet sticking out one end of the casing, or, shell casing.

Q: The bullet is contained within the casing?

A: Partially, yes.

Q: When a revolver is fired does the shell casing remain within the cylinder or is it ejected onto the ground?

A: It stays within the weapon.

Q: What about an automatic? When an automatic is fired what happens to the shell casings?

A: Generally speaking, when an automatic or semiautomatic weapon is fired the shell casing is ejected or thrown from the weapon onto surrounding surfaces.

MR. BUGLIOSI: No further questions.

THE FOREMAN: Does any member of the Grand Jury have a question they would like to ask the witness?

You are admonished not to discuss or impart at anytime outside of this Jury Room the questions that have been asked of you in regard to this matter, or your answers, until authorized by this Grand Jury or the Court to discuss or impart such matters.

You may be excused.

THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Lomax.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS: Mr. Lomax.

THE FOREMAN: Will you state your name; please.

THE WITNESS: Edward Lomax.

THE FOREMAN: Will you raise your right hand and take the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter now pending before the Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE WITNESS: So help me God.

THE FOREMAN: Would you please be seated.

Q: Would you please state your name and spell the name; sir.

A: Edward Lomax, L-o-m-a-x.

Q: What is your occupation; sir?

A: I am a product manager for the High Standard Firearms Manufacturing Company which is now a part of Leisure Group located in Los Angeles.

Q: How long have you been with high Standard?

A: Six years.

Q: What is your job with High Standard, again?

A: Before High Standard was purchased by Leisure Group I was director of marketing.

Q: What is your training and experience in the field of firearms?

A: The last six years with High Standard and various -- when you are director of marketing for a company you learn all of the facts about how they are manufactured.

Q: I direct your attention, sir, to the three pieces of grip depicted in this photograph here, Grand Jury Exhibit 33 for identification.

Have you ever seen the three pieces of grip that are shown in this photograph?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: When did you see those three pieces of grip for the first time?

A: I forget the date. It was Friday after the -- the Friday a week after the crime was committed.

Q: You are talking about the Tate homicides

A: Yes.

Q: Where did you see these three pieces of grip?

A: At the Police Academy.

Q: Who showed them to you?

A: Sergeant Lee.

Q: Sergeant William Lee from the Los Angeles Police Department?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you examine those three pieces of grip?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: Did you form any opinion from an examination of those three pieces of grip as to the manufacturer of the firearm to which they belonged?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: What opinion is that?

A: It is High Standard.

Q: That is the company that you have been working for for six years; is that correct?

A: Right.

Q: Did you form any opinion as to the model of the particular High Standard firearm?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: What is that opinion?

A: It could only come from a High Standard Longhorn model. This is the only model that we use that particular grip on.

MR. BUGLIOSI: I have here, Mr. Foreman, a photograph of a revolver.

The name of it, apparently, is Longhorn.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit 38 for identification?'

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 38 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes.

Q: What is shown in that photograph?

A: The Longhorn revolver, our number 9399, and an enlargement of the grip.

Q: Is this the type of firearm -- exact type of firearm from which the three pieces of grip came?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: You're sure about that?

A: Yes.

Q: How long is the barrel on the Longhorn firearm that is shown in Grand Jury Exhibit 38 for identification?

A: Nine and a half inches.

Q: The full name of this firearm is .22 caliber Longhorn Revolver?

A: Yes.

Q: Is it commonly known by any other name?

A: Sometimes it is commonly called the Buntline,

Q: Do you know why it is called a Buntline revolver?

A: Yes. Ned Buntline designed and built two of these revolvers and gave them to Wyatt Earp and from that time on it has been known as the Buntline.

Q: This Longhorn Buntline revolver, is this a common weapon?

A: Not too common.

Q: Would you say it is rather unique?

A: Rather unique. l think, since April, 1967, we have produced and sold possibly 2700.

Q: How do you compare 2700 with the manufacture of other firearms by High Standard?

A: About two percent in this particular type of weapon in a revolver.

Q: Other firearms are produced in much greater quantity by High Standard; is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: How many bullets are contained within the cylinder of this revolver?

A: Nine.

Q: Directing your attention, again, to the revolver shown in Grand Jury Exhibit 38 for identification, when you say it was a 9-1/2 inch barrel --

A: Yes.

Q: -- from what point are you measuring the length?

A: From the point where the barrel is flush with the inside of the frame.

Q: Would you please draw an extended line from that point?

A: Yep.

Q: You are measuring the 9-1/2 inches from this point right here?

A: Yes.

Q: To the muzzle; is that correct?

A: That is correct. That is exactly right.

Q: Would this be the commencement of the barrel, then, at this point?

A: Yes.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, may the record reflect that I am drawing an arrow from this line and writing in "Commencement of barrel"?

THE FOREMAN: The record may so reflect.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: And I am writing this on Grand Jury Exhibit 38 for identification.

Directly beneath the barrel and extending perhaps four inches from the commencement of the barrel see an extension.

Do you know what that extension is?

A: Yes, this is a magazine or cylinder release so that you push this forward and swing the cylinder so that you can release the cylinder.

Q: Does this cylinder release contain any springs?

A: Yes.

Q: Are the springs visible from the outside?

A: Partially so, yes.

MR. BUGLIOSI: No further questions.

THE FOREMAN: Any members of the Jury have a question they would like to ask the witness?

You are admonished not to discuss or impart at any time outside of this Jury Room the questions that have been asked of you in regard to this matter, or your answers, until authorized by this Grand Jury or the Court to discuss or impart such matters.

You may be excused.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

THE FOREMAN: We will take a five-minute recess at this time.

MR. STOVITZ: Mr. Jakobson; please.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS: Mr. Jakobson.

THE FOREMAN: Will you state your name; please.

THE WITNESS: Greg Jakobson.

THE FOREMAN: Will you raise your right hand and take the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter now pending before the Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE WITNESS: I do, sir.

THE FOREMAN: Will you please be seated.

Q: Mr. Jakobson, I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 4 for identification.

Do you know the name of the person who is depicted in that photograph?

A: I knew him as Charlie Watson and some of the people called him Tex.

Q: Did you also know him by the name of Charles Montgomery at all?

A: We didn't use last names but I sort of remember him having a Montgomery attached, but I always called him Charlie.

Q: So you knew the person depicted in the photograph, Grand Jury Exhibit 4, as Charlie Watson?

A: Yes.

Q: And he was also called Tex?

A: Yes, some of the people called him Tex.

Q: As far as you know, was he from Texas?

A: He had a strong Texas accent and spoke of Texas.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 15 for identification.

Do you know the name of the person shown in that photograph?

A: I first met him as Steve and then some time went by and I met him again and when I saw him again he was known as Clem. They called him Clem, so I called him Clem.

Q: Does the name Clem Tufts ring a bell to you?

A: The last names are really pretty vague, but, Clem Tufts, I can't really say about the last name, about Tufts, but definitely Clem.

Q: Does the last name Grogan mean anything to you; sound familiar?

A: No, sir.

Q: Steven Grogan does not sound familiar to you?

A: Very hazy. Steve, I remember him being introduced as Steve when I first met him sometime ago.

Q: Going back to Grand Jury 4 for identification, where did you meet Mr. Watson?

A: At the house of Dennis Wilson.

Q: Where was that located?

A: 914 Sunset Boulevard.

Q: How long ago did you meet Tex, or, Charles Watson at Dennis Wilson's house?

A: The summer of '68.

Q: What about Clem, or Steve, who is depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit 15 for identification, where did you meet him for the first time?

A: I met him for the first time, I'm pretty sure, at the ranch, at Spahn Ranch.

Q: In Chatsworth?

A: Yes.

Q: Approximately when did you meet Steve, or, Clem?

A: I would say sometime around this time last year, and that is pretty loose. That is give or take a month; month and a half.

Q: What was the occasion, sir, for you going out to the Spahn Ranch?

A: Well, Dennis and I were interested in recording Charlie and --

Q: You say "Charlie," are you referring to Charles Manson?

A: Charlie Manson, yes, and that was the primary reason and we would go out to see the people and Charles, too, but we were interested in the songs and music, half and half.

Q: What business are you engaged in; sir?

A: I work in record productions and I write some music. Just the general reproductions and productions of records.

Q: Do you know Terry Melcher?

A: Yes, very well.

Q: Did you ever accompany Terry Meicher out to the Spahn Ranch to listen to Charles Manson perform?

A: Twice.

Q: Who arranged for you and Mr. Melcher to go out to the Spahn Ranch?

A: That was primarily my doing.

We wanted some financial backing to do a film to accompany the music. In other words, I was trying to involve Terry in recording and filming.

Q: Who told you that Charlie Manson was a performer of sorts?

A: Well, Charlie was Charlie, he let us all know that. He was always performing. He told us that he was very much interested in recording.

Q: Did Manson perform, then, for you and Terry Melcher?

A: He did.

Q: Did he play his guitar?

A: Yes.

Q: Did he sing at all?

A: Yes.

Q: Did Melcher make any comment to Manson in your presence about Manson's ability one way or the other?

A: I think Terry showed some interest in the music but there was nothing positive. There was never any, "Yes, I will record you," talk going on.

Q: Did you hear Manson ask if they could talk Terry into some kind of a business arrangement?

A: No, I think such a conversation took place but I never was really present at it, and I used to work with Terry in the music business and something like this, it was too informal. It was like this would be the preliminaries and nothing ever came of it, got that far.

MR. BUGLIOSI: No further questions.

THE FOREMAN: Are there any questions that any members of the Jury would like to ask the witness?

You are admonished not to discuss or impart at any time outside of this Jury Room the questions that have been asked of you in regard to this matter, or your answers, until authorized by this Grand Jury or the Court to discuss or impart such matters.

You may be excused.

THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir.

MR. STOVITZ: Mr. Granado; please.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS: Mr. Granado.

THE FOREMAN: Will you state your name; please.

THE WITNESS: Manuel Joseph Granado.

THE FOREMAN: Will you raise your right hand and take the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter now pending before the Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE WITNESS: I do.

THE FOREMAN: Will you please be seated.

Q: Would you spell your name, again, sir.

A: My last name?

Q: Yes.

A: G-r-a-n-a-d-o.

Q: What is your occupation and assignment?

A: I'm a police officer for the City of Los Angeles, assigned to the Scientific Investigation Division as a criminalist.

Q: On the date of August the 9th, 1969, did you proceed to Roman Polanski's residence at 10050 Cielo Drive in West Los Angeles?

A: I did.

Q: What time did you arrive there?

A: I would say approximately 10:00 o'clock or so.

Q: 10:00 in the morning?

A: Yes.

Q: I direct your attention to Grand Jury Exhibit No. 33 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, it is a grip composed of three pieces.

Q: When is the first time, if at all, that you observed the three pieces that are shown in this photograph?

A: Upon arrival through the front door of the residence at the date of 8-9-69.

Q: You mean August 9, 1969?

A: Yes.

Q: You will notice that there are three pieces here shown in the photograph, two large pieces, and one very small piece.

Where did you find all three of these pieces?

A: The two large pieces I found inside the living room of the residence.

Q: Where inside the living room?

A: You want --

Q: The living room floor? ..

A: Yes.

Q: What about the small piece?

A: The small piece was immediately outside, approximately a foot away from the door, the front door of the residence.

Q: What did you do with these three pieces? Did you pick them up?

A: Yes, I picked them up with my thongs and had them fingerprinted, instructing them to be careful with some blood that was on the pieces of the hand grip.

Q: The two large pieces?

A: Yes, and after having them printed I placed them in a polyethylene plastic bag and took them to the laboratory.

Q: Of the Los Angeles Police Department?

A: That is correct.

Q: Do you know Sergeant Bill Lee?

A: Yes, I do.

Q: Did you hand these three pieces of grip over to Sergeant Lee?

A: I did.

Q: On what date?

A: I believe it was August 14.

Q: 1969?

A: Yes.

Q: And you relinquished them to his custody?

A: Yes, I did.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I have here a photograph of a rope.

May it be marked Grand Jury Exhibit No. 39 identification?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 39 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, it is a white -- or, was a white, in certain areas, nylon-type rope.

Q: And where did you see that rope for the first time?

A: At the Polanski residence.

Q: Where was the rope inside the Polanski residence when you first saw this?

A: This portion photographed here, which I had photographed, was on the Sharon Tate portion of the rope.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 27 for identification, a photograph of a female Caucasian previously identified as Sharon Marie Polanski, or, Sharon Tate.

You note there is a rope around her neck. When you arrived at the scene was that rope around her neck?

A: That is correct.

Q: Is this the same rope that is depicted in Grand Jury Exhibit 39 for identification?

A: That is correct.

Q: Did you examine the rope to determine how tight it was around her neck, if at all?

A: I took a look at that along with the Coroner at the scene.

Q: Was it wrapped tight around her neck?

A: It appeared to be wrapped around and then around again and it didn't appear to have a knot in it but just wrapped around the neck.

Q: Did it appear to be wrapped twice around her neck?

A: That is correct.

Q: Did the rope extend onto any other person?

A: Yes, it extended over to Jay Sebring, the fellow who was sitting, or, lying on the floor in the same living room but on the -- I would say probably it would be the south part of the house.

Q: What part of Sebring's body was the rope around?

A: Around his neck.

Q: How many times was it wound around his neck?

A: It went around the same as Sharon Tate except that the rope went in and tied.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 28 for identification.

Do you know what is shown in that photograph?

A: Yes.

Q: What is shown in that photograph?

A: This is Mr. Sebring and the rope leading here was severed and this rope was attached to that.

Q: When you arrived at the scene was this a fair and accurate representation -- I have shown you Grand Jury Exhibit 28 for identification, is that a fair and accurate representation of the way Jay Sebring appeared when you arrived at the scene?

A: No, he had -- his face was wrapped and he was face down. He was turned over by the Coroner for this photo.

Q: Were you present when this photograph was taken?

A: Yes.

Q: Is this a fair and accurate representation of what is shown therein?

A: That is correct.

Q: Now, there is a rope around Sebring's neck.

Is that the rope that you have been referring to in your testimony?

A: Yes, the other portion of this rope, which is in Property.

Q: Now, the rope which is shown in Grand Jury Exhibit 39 for identification, that is not the entire rope that wrapped around Sebring's and Sharon Tate's neck; is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: This is only a portion of the rope that was wrapped around Sharon Tate's neck; is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: What type of material, again, is this rope?

A: It is a nylon rope.

Q: How many strands?

A: Let me refer to my notebook.

Three large strands with multiple smaller strands. Three major strands. I have here.

Q: So the rope, then, is nylon, three strands; is that correct?

A: That is correct. And, also, I have the color quoted, internal strand, which is used for identification by the manufacturer.

Q: Directing your attention, again, to Grand Jury Exhibit 39 for identification, what did you do with this rope after you found it?

A: This rope, after I saw it at the scene, went along with the body to the Coroner.

It was severed by the Coroner at the scene and Sharon Tate's portion stayed with her body and the other portion stayed with Sebring's body.

I later picked this up from the Coroner and took it to the laboratory. I made blood tests of various locations on the rope and studied the rope, took portions of it for identification, and booked the rope back into Central Property until I needed it again.

Q: Is the rope which is shown in Grand Jury Exhibit 39 for identification, is that presently booked with the Property Division of the Los Angeles Police Department?

A: I have it up in the laboratory presently. I took the rope out to have it photographed and also to take parts of it for analysis.

Q: So it is presently in your custody?

A: That is correct.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No 30 for identification.

Have you seen the knife shown in that photograph?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: When did you see that knife for she first time?

A: When my partner and --

Q: Who is your partner?

A: Hale, H-a-l-e.

Q: Is he a sergeant?

A: No, sir, he is a civilian chemist. He had arrived at the scene with me.

I pushed the cushion on one of the sitting chairs in the living room next to the fireplace and in so doing I saw this knife standing upward in one of the folds, in one of the -- back -- the crack in back of the chair there and I immediately photographed it in place and then I had the knife fingerprinted.

Q: Was there any blood on any portion of the knife when you found it?

A: No, after being fingerprinted I checked the knife for blood and could not find any reaction for blood upon it.

Q: Do you know the length of the blade of the knife that is shown in that photograph, Grand Jury Exhibit 30 for identification?

A: That is a 3-3/4 inch blade. It is a buck knife found by myself and Hale. It had no reaction for blood.

Q: Referring to the knife that is shown in Grand Jury Exhibit 30 for Identification?

A: That is correct.

Q: That blade was 3-3/4 inches?

A: That is correct. This knife, on the other side, has, also, a broken piece of wood.

Q: There is a broken piece of wood on this knife, Grand Jury Exhibit 30 for identification?

A: Yes, approximately at this location there is a chip off. Otherwise, I can identify also had my name on the other side.

Q: Where is that knife now?

A: I checked that knife back into Property of the Los Angeles Police Department, after taking this photograph.

MR. BUGLIOSI: No further questions of this witness.

THE FOREMAN: Any questions members of the Grand Jury may have?

Q BY MR. BUGLIOSI: Showing you Grand Jury Exhibit 30 for identification, is the blade sharpened on both sides, the blade to that knife?

A: The blade is sharpened on this side.

Q: On the bottom side?

A: Yes.

Q: But not on the top?

A: The cutting edge.

Q: This side does appear to be sharpened?

A: The cutting edge is sharp.

Q: The other edge of the blade is not sharp; is that correct?

A: That is correct.

MR. STOVITZ: No further questions.

We will ask that the witness be excused.

THE FOREMAN: You are admonished not to discuss or impart at any time outside of this Jury Room the questions that have been asked of you in regard to this matter, or your answers, until authorized by this Grand Jury or the Court to discuss or impart such matters.

You may be excused.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. DeCarlo.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS: Mr. DeCarlo.

THE FOREMAN: Will you state your name; please.

THE WITNESS: Danny DeCarlo.

THE FOREMAN: Will you raise your right hand and take the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter now pending before the Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE WITNESS: Yeah.

THE FOREMAN: Would you please be seated.

Q: Mr. DeCarlo, would you kindly state your name again for the record.

A: Danny DeCarlo.

Q: Mr. DeCarlo, we anticipate questioning you concerning certain incidents that occurred at the Spahn Movie Ranch between August the 8, 1969, and August the 16th, 1969, between those dates.

You have been informed that if you feel in any way that any of your answers may incriminate you that you have a right under the Fifth Amendment and under the California Constitution not to answer anything that may incriminate you.

You have been informed of that; is that correct?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Are you testifying freely and voluntarily before this Grand Jury?

A: Yes, I am.

Q: And you realize, sir, that you are under oath?

A: Yes, I do.

Q: I'd like to direct your attention to the photograph which is Grand Jury Exhibit No. 2 and ask you if you know the man depicted in that photograph.

A: Yes, that is Charlie.

Q: Charlie what?

A: Charles Manson.

Q: And when did you first make Mr. Manson's acquaintance, approximately?

A: In March of '69.

Q: And in what connection did you meet him; sir?

A: Well, he had a motorcycle, a three-wheeler that had a blown engine on it and he wanted me to fix it. He wanted me to rebuild the engine.

Q: Are you pretty good at rebuilding engines on motorcycles?

A: I am. On Harleys, I am an expert.

Q: What about automobiles?

A: No.

Q: Now, then, did you go anywhere with Mr. Manson or did you do the work for him, or what?

A: Yes, I fixed the bike.

Q: Where did you fix it?

A: I fixed it there at the ranch.

Q: Spahn Ranch?

A: Spahn Ranch; right.

Q: Then did you continue to stay at the ranch, or did you come and go, or what?

A: I spent seventy-five percent of my time at the ranch.

Q: Now, on or about August the 16th, 1969, were you arrested with other people at the Spahn Ranch by the Deputy Sheriffs?

A: Yes, I was.

Q: And were you subsequently released?

A: Yes, they only held me for 72 hours and let me go.

Q: As a result of that arrest are there any charges pending against you in the County of Los Angeles?

A: No.

Q: Or in the State of California?

A: No.

Q: Now, for the ten days prior to that arrest -- that arrest took place on August 16, 1969, you say, from August the 6th up to August the 16th, the time you were arrested, were you living at any one particular place continuously?

A: I was at the ranch.

Q: That is Spahn Ranch?

A: That is Spahn Ranch; right.

Q: And were you living in any particular location at that ranch?

A: My house was the bunkhouse.

Q: And did you have any particular reason for staying there at that ranch? Were you being employed there? What was your occupation there?

A: Lots of pretty girls up there.

Q: Were you interested in a particular girl you saw there?

A: Yeah.

Q: I'm going to show you some girls.

I will show you Exhibit 1, Grand Jury Exhibit 1.

Do you know the girl depicted in that photograph?

A: Sadie.

Q: Sadie Glutz?

A: Yeah.

Q: Were you interested in Sadie Glutz?

A: No, we didn't get along too good.

Q: I show you Exhibit 16.

Do you know the girl depicted in that photograph?

A: Leslie.

Q: Leslie Sankston?

A: Yes.

Q: Were you interested in that girl depicted in that photograph?

A: No, she was interested in me some but I wouldn't -- she chased me around a lot.

Q: That wasn't the reason for your staying at the ranch because of Leslie?

A: Not them two, no.

Q: I show you a photograph, Grand Jury Exhibit 3. Do you know the girl depicted in that picture?

A: Katie.

Q: Patricia Krenwinkel? Is that another name that she used or --

A: I just knew her as Katie.

Q: Just Katie?

A: Nobody used their right names.

Q: And this girl shown in Exhibit 3 that you call Katie, was she the reason that you were staying at the ranch?

A: Oh, no, not her.

Q: Did you get along with Katie?

A: We talked, that is about it, but I never did nothing. You know, I never snatched her up or anything.

Q: I show you a girl depicted in Exhibit 5.

Do you know who that girl is?

A: That's Linda.

Q: Linda Kasabian?

A: Yes.

Q: And was she the reason you were staying at the ranch?

A: No, but I know we got together once.

Q: And this person depicted in this photograph, is that a man or a woman?

A: That is Clem.

Q: I take it it is a man, then?

A: Yes.

Q: And that wasn't the reason you stayed at the ranch?

A: Huh-uh.

Q: Do you know what Clem's last name was or what other nickname he may have had?

A: I only knew his first name, that is Steve.

This name here, Grant, that is the name he used when we went to County Jail. That was the name he used.

Q: You are speaking about the name Grant that appears on this photograph, that was the name that the fellow depicted in Exhibit No. 15 used at the Sheriff's Office when you were arrested on August the 16th?

A: On the 16th, right.

Q: I show you Exhibit 4. Is this a photograph of anyone you know?

A: Yes, that is Tex.

Q: Did he use any particular name when he was arrested on August the 16th?

A: He wasn't arrested. He wasn't at the ranch. He was out in Death Valley, then.

Q: Do you know what Tex's real name is?

A: All I knew was his first name Charlie. I got that from a truck he had. It was a '36 Dodge. I was looking through the glove compartment and I looked on the sales slip and it was Charles Montgomery.

Q: All right, now, showing you all of the pictures of the girls, there was none that you were interested in?

A: No, none of those.

Q: And did you tell us, also, of a child that you are the father of that was staying there at the ranch from time to time?

A: I brought my little boy up there approximately three days before because my wife had him but she wasn't -- she wasn't taking care of him so I went to Venice and brought my boy back up here.

Q: This was 3 days before August the 16th?

A: Yeah.

Q: How old is your son?

A: A year and a half.

Q: And was he taken into custody at that time with you on August the 16th?

A: Yes, he was.

Q: And then did you later receive the return of his custody?

A: Well, the welfare people was -- they gave him to my mother, see but then that went on for about a week and then my mother called them and she told them to come and get him.

Q: So the welfare people have him?

A: Yes, they took him -- they took him again.

Q: And you know that your testimony here before this Grand Jury has got nothing to do with whether or not your child will or will not be returned to you; do you understand that?

A: Well, I'm just saying what the welfare people did.

Q: The welfare people had put the child with your mother and that was satisfactory with you?

A: Yes, it was.

Q: Now, sir, going back, again, to the Spahn Ranch, you say that you were employed there; is that correct?

A: No, I wasn't getting no money.

Q: When you fixed this three-wheeler motorcycle for Mr. Manson did he pay you any money?

A: Not in money.

Q: And did you do any other work for Mr. Manson or any other people there at the ranch?

A: Well, he was on a motorcycle thing whereas he wanted to do this thing with motorcycles but he decided on dune buggies.

Q: That is Mr. Manson?

A: Right. So me being an expert motorcycle mechanic and plus I belong to a club, a powerful club that he knew and he wanted my club to come up there but they didn't want nothing to do with him.

His idea, what he wanted to do with my club was to scare the public away, you know, and they didn't want nothing to do with him.

Q: There is a club known as the Hell's Angels, is that your club?

A: No.

Q: And is your motorcycle club the kind that goes into a town and scares everybody, the type you see in the movies?

A: No, that only happens in the movies.

Q: Now, let's go back to August 16th.

You said that for that ten-day period prior to that you were living there at the bunkhouse?

A: Right.

Q: And once in a while I guess you'd, get together with the girl that you were sweet on; is that right?

A: Yeah.

Q: And she is not any of these girls?

A: No.

Q: Would you want to give us the name that she was using there at the ranch so we can call her some name?

A: Ruth.

Q: Now, Mr. Manson, where was he living?

A: He didn't live in no particular place. There were two little shacks that he mostly stayed at but nobody had one particular place to stay except for me because I do a lot of drinking, you know, I sit and drink and play the radio and Charlie didn't like nobody to drink and I also got the girls to cash in Coke bottles, also, to go buy beer and he didn't like that so he kept away from me.

Q: Did you know where Mr. Charles Watson lived during that week?

A: He stayed at the ranch but what part of the ranch I don't know; mostly the saloon.

Q: Was there a saloon out at the ranch?

A: Yeah, the saloon, because him and Marie -- him and Marie spent a lot of time together.

Q: Marie's last name is what?

A: I know her as Marie Brunner.

Q: And was she arrested on August 16th at the time the Sheriffs got there?

A: No, she was in jail.

Q: When, to your knowledge, was she taken into custody? Do you know?

A: I think it was a couple of days after Gary got it, after Hinman got it.

Q: Hinman got it sometime in the middle of July?

A: Yeah, it was right after that.

Q: Now, when was it, to your knowledge, that means to your own thinking, that you first heard about five people getting killed at one time?

A: On the 15th when my club come there.

Q: From what source did you learn that?

A: Well, I heard it from Sadie who was talking to another girl in another room.

Q: What girl was Sadie talking to?

A: A girl, I don't know.

Q: And on August the 15th, then, you --  in other words, you had not heard it on the radio or seen it on television or read it in the newspaper that five people were killed on August the 9th, 1969?

A: No, sir, I didn't.

Q: On August the 15th your club came up?

A: That night.

Q: Was this the night just before you were arrested?

A: Just a few hours.

Q: And was there a happening that occurred at that time when your club came up there? I mean, was it something big or did they just come up?

A: They came up to get me because they wanted me back in Venice with my brothers where I belonged.

Q: When you speak about "brothers," are you speaking about blood brothers or club brothers?

A: My club brothers, and they wanted to -- they came up there to visit and Charlie would sit down there and run this thing down to them about tearing society apart, things like that, and they thought he was nuts and figured they was brainwashing me and they came up there to get me and they were going to take him and wad him up in a rubber ball.

Q: And somehow or other that didn't happen?

A: No, because I stopped it because I knew why they were up there. I knew something was wrong when they didn't talk to me.

Q: To your knowledge, did you know whether or not prior -- that means before -- August the 15th, whether or not Charlie Manson had any guns?

A: Oh, yeah.

Q: When was it that you first became aware that Mr. Manson had guns?

A: The latter part of June.

Q: Of 1969?

A: Right.

Q: Now, do you have any familiarity with guns?

A: Yeah, I am almost an expert on them.

Q: You are almost as good at guns as you are at fixing motorcycles?

A: Yes.

Q: Were you in the service?

A: Yes, I was in the Coast Guard for four years.

Q: When you were in the Coast Guard did you have any particular specialty?

A: Weapons expert.

Q: And when you were out there at the ranch, you say, in June of 1969, you saw Charles Manson in possession of certain types of guns; is that right?

A: Well, all the guns were kept in the bunkhouse where I stayed at.

Q: What kind of guns were they?

A: We had a .45 auto, we had a 9 mm. Radon, we had a 1903 Springfield, we had an M-1 carbine with an M-2 stock on it. There was a 12-gauge police riot gun, a .22 rifle, and a machinegun.

Q: Now, did you ever see anything of a .22 caliber Buntline revolver?

A: Yes.

Q: Where was that kept?

A: That was kept with me in the bunkhouse.

Q: And when did you first see this .22 caliber Buntline revolver?

A: In June.

Q: And who, if anyone, showed it to you or how did you get hold of it?

A: He traded a gun for a truck, the truck that I got parked outside, and so Charlie gave this truck to another guy and -- in trade for this pistol.

See, this is something I didn't know about, he just did it behind my back, and the next day I got up, "Where is my truck at?"

"Oh, well, I took it. He gave me this in return for it."

And that was the .22 Buntline pistol.

Q: When you speak about Charlie, are you speaking about Manson?

A: Right.

Q: So all the time that you have referred to Charlie we know that you are referring to Manson?

A: There is only one Charlie, that is Charlie Manson, and Tex was -- never in the six months there have I ever referred to him as Charlie.

Q: Now, you say this Buntline .22 caliber revolver was in your possession. How would you keep it, on your person, or put it in a safe?

A: It set up on top -- the gun -- the pistol, it sat on a little bench, it just sat there, or there was a stove there that it was put in with the stove, inside the stove, but, I mean, nobody claimed ownership to anything. No one particular pistol belonged to anybody, but as far as Charlie went, Charlie -- he didn't -- this was the only pistol he ever wanted to secure.

Q: Which one?

A: The .22 Buntline.

Q: Have you ever seen Charles Manson use that .22 caliber Buntline?

A: I have seen him shoot it.

Q: When he shot it was it at any particular thing, target practice or what?

A: Just target practice.

Q: Where was that target practice?

A: At the ranch and when George would leave at 5:00 o'clock, well, there was a barrel there that sat out on the street, a trash barrel, and he would go in the bunkhouse and step out from the bunkhouse and the barrel was directly there ahead of us, maybe 50 yards, and that was the target.

Q: Who is this George that you referred to?

A: George, the old man that owns the ranch.

Q: Spahn?

A: Right.

Q: Would this Mr. Spahn actually live on the ranch or would he come and go?

A: No, he had his house right there. He lived there constantly.

Q: Now, when was the last time, to your knowledge, that you saw this .22 caliber Buntline revolver before August the 16th, 1969?

A: About a week, a week and a half.

Q: Now, on the day that the arrest was made on August the 16th, did the Sheriff's Office also confiscate -- that means take hold of -- a lot of guns?

A: Yes.

Q: Was that .22 caliber revolver there at that time?

A: No.

Q: Now, you said that you had seen it for the last time about a week to a week and a half before; is that right?

A: Right.

Q: In whose possession was it at that time?

A: I don't know.

Q: Was it in the bunkhouse?

A: Yes, it was always kept in the bunkhouse.

Q: Now, when before that time that you last saw it in the bunkhouse had you last seen it in Charlie Manson's possession?

A: Maybe two weeks before the 16th.

Q: Did you ever see anyone else, Tex or Clem or any of the girls ever use that .22 caliber Buntline revolver?

A: Not the girls but Tex and Clem shot the pistol before.

Q: Where would you get the ammunition for that?

A: You can buy ammo anywhere.

Q: What kind of ammo would it take?

A: .22 long.

Q: And would automatic ammunition fit into this revolver?

A: There is no difference between the .22 automatic ammunition and the .22 revolver, they are all the same.

Q: On or about August the 17th, 1969, which is about two weeks ago, did the Los Angeles Police Department question you about this particular revolver?

A: Could you say that date again?

Q: On or about August --  I'm sorry, November the 17th, 1969,  did the Los Angeles Police Department question you about this particular revolver?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: And did you draw a picture of a revolver for them at that time?

A: Yes, I did.

MR. STOVITZ: Mr. Foreman, I have a pencil drawing.

May the pencil drawing be marked Exhibit 40 for -- Grand Jury Exhibit 40?

THE FOREMAN: It may be so marked.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit 40.

Is that the illustration that you made for the police at that time?

A:   Yes, it is.

Q: And at the time that you were making this illustration, Exhibit 40, did you try to recapture at that time what the revolver had looked like to you?

A: Yes, to the best of my knowledge.

Q: All right, now, this is dated November the 17th, and August is the eighth month, so there was approximately three or three and a half months since you had last seen the revolver at the time you drew this photograph; is that right?

A: Right.

Q: Now, this "8" that you have written in here, what does that "8" indicate?

A: The barrel length.

Q: And the other drawing on that, that was all made by you; is that correct?

A: Yeah, I drew the picture.

Q: And how many shots did this gun hold? How many bullets did it hold?

A: It held nine rounds.

Q: Now, I will show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 38.

A: That is it.

Q: Have you ever seen this particular photograph before today?

A: Before today?

Q: Yes.

A: Yes, I have.

Q: And when you looked at this photograph were you looking at this photograph at the time that you were drawing this illustration, Exhibit 40?

A: No, I made this approximately two weeks before I ever saw that.

Q: By "that," you mean Exhibit 38?

A: This picture here, right.

Q: Now that you see Exhibit 38 can you tell us whether or not Exhibit 38 is a replica -- that means the same type gun as the one you have been describing?

A: Yes, it is. I know weapons.

Q: You know them and have you fired that particular gun shown in Exhibit 38?

A: Yes.

Q: Now, with relation to the incident that you say that you first learned of five people getting killed, you say that you heard Sadie talking to some girl in the bunkhouse about it.

Have you ever heard any of the fellows talking about that incident either before that time or after that time?

A: Yeah, Clem.

Q: All right, and that is the man shown in Exhibit No. 15.

Who was Clem talking to?

A: He was talking to me.

Q: And was this before the 15th of August or after the 15th of August?

A: This is approximately the following day or either two days after the 9th.

Q: How do you know it was two days after the 9th?

A: Because I remember the night they went out on that, whereas they were dressed in black, Sadie and Linda were dressed in black.

Q: You say you remember the night that they went out. Now, that night had no particular significance to you; right?

A: No.

Q: Had you ever seen Sadie and Linda go out dressed in black before that night?

A: Not before or not since

Q: And they went out in what kind of car; if you know?

A: I didn't see them leave in the car, I saw them standing in front of the Rock City Cafe and she was tucking her black capris inside her boots.

Q: Who is "she"?

A: She is Sadie.

Q: That is Sadie Glutz?

A: Sadie Glutz.

Q: This is the one shown in this picture?

A: Yes, this one right here.

Q: Would you give us the number?

A: 5758 --

Q: No, that little white ticket.

A: Exhibit 1.

Q: So Sadie was tucking her tights into her boots; is that right?

A: Yes.

Q: And who was Sadie with at that time?

A: She was with Linda.

Q: Will you please show us Linda.

A: Yeah, this broad right here.

Q: Exhibit No. 5, and may the record reflect, Mr. Foreman, that all five rather -- four photographs of these girls are before the witness and they are not in any particular order, that the witness is picking them out at his random selection.

All right, now, how was Linda dressed?

A: She was just in black, the same as Sadie.

Q: Were either Linda or Sadie carrying any particular weapons at that time?

A: Not that I seen.

Q: Did you overhear any particular conversation at that time?

A: Well, as far as conversation, the first conversation I ever heard was from Clem and they came back -- this was approximately the next day -- now, I can't -- I saw no calendar, no clock, so I can't give you exact dates but I says, "What did you do last night?"

And he kind of looked at me and smiled but then he looked over my shoulder and Charlie was standing behind me.

Q: Charlie Manson?

A: Manson, yeah, and so he kind of looked at Charlie and Charlie looked at Clem just as if to say -- not to say nothing, and so Charlie more or less said, "Well, we took care of business," something along that line.

So Charlie turned around and walked away from me, that is, away from my back, see, and then I turned to Clem and Clem looked at me and turned around and walked away and said, "We got five piggies," and that was what was said. That was the first time I heard "five piggies."

Okay, I just let it go at that because I never thought nothing of it.

On the night of the 15th when the club come up to get me, well, me and one of my brothers was outside on the boardwalk out front there and everything was pretty well commotion, they took a gun off Clem and was going to tear the whole place apart, and beat all of them people to pieces and Sadie said, "We can take care of the Straights like we took care of them five piggies."

They were mad because we --

Q: By "they," you mean the girls at the ranch were mad?

A: Everybody up at the ranch there was mad.

Q: Including the motorcycle group?

A: They were up there to wad Charlie into a little ball.

Q: So then you said Sadie said something about what, again?

A: She said, "We can take care of them Straights just like they took care of them five piggies."

Q: Straight Satans is the name of your club?

A: Yes.

Q: What happened next?

A: That was all the conversation that went that night. It was pretty much in turmoil. I wanted to hurry up and get the people out. I said, "Let's go down and have a beer." So I made everybody get in all their cars and get on their bikes again and shoot down there into the Valley so I could get them away from the ranch. I didn't want them to start no trouble up there.

Q: About 6:00 o'clock the next morning the Sheriffs raided the place and arrested everybody there; right, except George Spahn?

A: Right.

Q: And then you were kept in custody with  I of the fellows like Tex -- I'm sorry, you say Tex was not at the ranch?

A: Tex was out in the desert. Tex left the night before.

Q: He left the night before your brothers came up?

A: Approximately the night or the night before that, a couple nights before that.

Q: What about Clem, was Clem up there at the time?

A: No, he got busted with me.

Q: And was Mr. Manson arrested with you on August 16th?

A: Yeah, he was handcuffed right to him.

Q: Then you were taken to the Sheriff's Department and you were let loose, you say, 72 hours later; is that right?

A: Yeah, they took us to Malibu and then they took us to County.

Q: In the time that you were in custody did you ever hear Clem at any time discuss this five piggy incident again?

A: No, sir.

Q: After you got out after this 72 hours did you go anywhere with the Manson group?

A: Well, the day -- the night I got out I went back to the ranch.

Q: Spahn Ranch?

A: Spahn Ranch.

About four or five days after that then I went up to Death Valley. I drove the truck up there.

Q: When you went back to the Spahn Ranch after you were released from the Sheriff's Department was Mr. Watson there at the ranch?

A: No, he was there in Death Valley. He never came down from there.

Q: Were any of the girls there at the ranch?

A: No, because I was the first one to get out.

Q: And then you stated that you stayed at the ranch for about four or five days; is that correct?

A: Right.

Q: And then did you go with anyone up to Death Valley?

A: I went with -- the last thing I said about Tex being up in Death Valley all that time, no, he did come down.

Q: Do you remember when it was that he came down

A: No, but it was after we all got out of jail, so it would have been within four days because me, Bruce and Tex drove the truck up there.

Q: Who was in this truck with you?

A: Just us three.

Q: Did Mr. Manson go up to Death Valley?

A: Yeah, he went in a car.

Q: Do you remember who went with him?

A: Well, all the young girls did. All the younger ones.

Q: And when you went up to Death Valley did you have a particular place that you were going to meet at?

A: At the -- well, see, the Barker Ranch, we was going to stay up at the Barker Ranch but Paul was up there, word came down that Paul Crocket (phonetic) was living on the Barker Ranch now and, you know, Charlie couldn't live there.

Well, one of the girls, Katie Meyer (phonetic) her grandmother owned the Meyer Ranch about a quarter of a mile down the road, down the little wash there, and when we first got to Death Valley we went over there to the Meyer's Ranch and stayed there.

Q: How long did you continue staying up there at Death Valley?

A: Well, I was there for about four days.

Q: And did you ever return to live at the Spahn Ranch again?

A: No, when I left Death Valley that was it.

Q: I'd like to show you a photograph, sir, Grand Jury Exhibit 12. Do you know who this girl is that is depicted in this photograph?

A: I know who she is now.

Q: Do you know who she is now?

A: Now I know.

Q: Who is she?

A: She is called -- what name do you have? Sharon Tate; isn't it?

Q: All right, Sharon Tate.

Did you ever see Sharon Tate at the Spahn Ranch?

A: Never.

Q: You were there continuously for six months before August the 15th, 1969?

A: Yes.

Q: She had never been up at the ranch?

A: I would have been the first one to know about it

Q: All right, now, with relation to what went on when you went to Independence, did you ever get a chance to talk to Charlie Watson, that is, Tex, about anything relating to these five piggies?

A: Not up in Death Valley, it was back down there at Spahn's Ranch, approximately maybe a day or two days after the 9th because he was limping, see, and they used to have karate classes up there and the thing was to kick, you know, with your foot, so he was limping.

I said, "What happened to your foot?"

And he says, "Me and this guy got into it."

And I said, "You hurt your foot?"

He says, "Yeah."

I says, "Well, what did you do to him?"

He says, "I took his money."

I said, "How much did you get?"

He said, "Seventy-five dollars"

And I just -- it sounded like I figured it was just maybe a bar fight, those are pretty common.

Q: But he never mentioned anything to you about five piggies or anything?

A: No, never, because he was pretty -- he was really quiet. He never said anything except when Charlie wasn't there. Well, then, he jumped in -- he started -- he jumped up there where the king's throne was. He took over until Charlie got back and then he retreated back like a little mouse, just like the rest of them did.

Q: Going back, again, to what you fix in your mind as, approximately August the 9th, 1969, when you say that you saw Susan at -- or, Sadie and Linda Kasabian dressed in black, did you hear anyone say anything as to where they were going to go or what they were going to do?

A: Just on a caper.

Q: Just on a caper.

About what time of night was it that you recall seeing them?

A: Around 9:00 o'clock.

Q: Bearing in mind that this is August, now, was it still daylight or had it turned dark?

A: No, it got dark late.

Q: When was the next time that you saw these people?

A: That I can't exactly remember. Maybe a couple of days after that, maybe the next day, I don't know.

Q: And did you ever remember seeing Patricia Krenwinkel, the girl that you call Katie, on that occasion or on an occasion a day after or on an occasion a day before?

A: No, I didn't.

MR. STOVITZ: This is Mr. Bugliosi. He will be asking you questions from now on.

Q: Looking at this girl, again, Sharon Tate, Grand Jury Exhibit 12 for identification, you never saw her at the Spahn Ranch?

A: No, nothing there was -- no girls up there were that good looking.

Q: Do you know a man by the name of Armstrong?

A: Yeah.

Q: Do you know his first name?

A: Mike.

Q: Is he presently the foreman out at Spahn Ranch?

A: From what the papers say he is.

Q: Have you seen Mr. Armstrong over television?

A: I sure did.

Q: Did you hear him say anthing?

A: I sure did.

Q: About Sharon Tate being at the ranch frequently?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: During the summer of 1969 how many times did you see Armstrong out at the Spahn Ranch?

A: In the six months I was there I saw him three times.

Q: What were the six months you were out there?

A: March till the beginning of September.

Q: Of '69?

A: Of '69.

Q: Armstrong was not the foreman during that period?

A: No, he was not, he was nothing.

Q: Did Armstrong live at the ranch during that period?

A: No.

Q: You saw him three times out there?

A: Yes, three times.

Q: Did he stay overnight?

A: No, he only stayed there, at the most, ten minutes at the most.

Q: During that six-month period, this man Armstrong who has been saying over television that Sharon Tate was out there several times, you say Armstrong was only seen at the ranch on three occasions and then only for a short period of ten minutes or so; is that correct?

A: Yes, that is definitely correct.

Q: I direct your attention to Grand Jury Exhibit No. 11 for identification, Mr. DeCarlo, and I point to the girl in the photograph. There is a man and a woman.

I am referring to the woman that has previously been identified as one Abigail Folger. Did you ever see her out at the ranch?

A: No.

Q: Directing your attention to Grand Jury Exhibit No. 15 for identification, the bottom left-hand corner, it says "Mollan, M-o-l-l-a-n, Grant."

This is the individual you refer to as Clem?

A: Yeah

The only time he used that name there was when we got popped on the 16th.

Q: You did hear Clem use the name Grant Mollan on August the 16th?

A: He had it on his County Jail arm band.

Q: And you also had know Clem as Steve; is that correct?

A: Steve, this is his real name.

Q: Looking, again, at this Longhorn Buntline revolver, Grand Jury Exhibit 39 for identification, the Buntline revolver that you saw Charlie Manson walk around with, was it identical to this one or did it differ in any respect?

A: I would say it is identical.

It's a High Standard; isn't it?

Q: Well, it is listed here as a Longhorn, nine-shot .22 caliber revolver.

What I want to know is, the revolver that is shown in this photograph is it the same identical type of revolver that you saw Charlie Manson walking around with?

A: Yes.

Q: Is there any doubt in your mind about that?

A: None whatsoever.

Q: Directing your attention, again, to this drawing that you made for the Los Angeles Police Department, Grand Jury Exhibit No. 40 for identification, you made it on November 17th.

I direct your attention to what appears to be your effort to draw in some springs beneath the barrel.

Is that what you were attempting to draw there?

A: Yeah, if you turn the pistol the other way, like right here, when the round is fired it -- this is called a side gate, it comes open, the plunger comes back, a round goes through and takes the empty brass and ejects it. On this thing here, this is what I was doing. When you want to eject the empty brass you pull this back.

Q: You are convincing me of the fact that you are an expert but you may be losing some of the Grand Jurors here.

Were you attempting to draw in some springs here beneath the barrel? Are those springs?

A: Yes, it is a spring.

Q: Now, directing your attention to Grand Jury Exhibit. 38 for identification, you notice that there is an extension here beneath the barrel?

A: The spring is inside there, right here.

Q: The spring is inside the extension?

A: On the other side you can see the actuation of the spring in there.

Q: So the spring is visible inside this extension from the other side?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: You can see it without opening up the extension?

A: You can see it, you can just pick the pistol up.

Q: And you can see the spring?

A: Right.

Q: This is what you were attempting to draw in this drawing?

A: Right.

Q: You indicated that an individual gave this Buntline revolver to Charles Manson in return for something else; is that correct?

A: Yeah, he traded my truck for the pistol, gave my truck away.

Q: Do you know the individual that Charlie entered into this transaction with?

A: Yeah

Q: What is his name?

A: Bill Vance.

Q: Bill Vance is also known as Cowboy Bill?

A: I never heard him by that name?

Q: How old is Bill Vance?

A: He is the same age as Charlie.

Q: About 35?

A: Yes.

Q: Does Bill Vance go by any other name other than Bill Vance?

A: Just Bill Vance.

Q: You don't know him by any other name?

A: No, I don't.

Q: Does Bill run around with Bruce Davis?

A: Yes, he does.

Q: Do you know where Bill Vance is now?

A: I did.

Q: Where is that?

A: He was down in Venice, the 28 Club House.

Q: 28 Club House?

A: Right.

Q: What is the 28 Club House?

A: Well, that is the address. I have never been down there. My brothers were down there snooping around and so they went down there and talked to him and wanted to talk to me pretty dearly.

Q: I show you Grand Jury Exhibit No. 39 for identification. Does this appear to be a photograph of a rope?

A: Nylon line.

Q: When you say "line," are you speaking synonymously with rope when you say line?

A: Well, line is a thing that I picked up from the service. Everything is line.

Q: It is a navy term?

A: Right, I was in the Coast Guard.

Q: When you say "line," you are not referring to something other than a rope, are you?

A: No, I refer to it as line.

Q: So, you use the term line and rope synonymously; is that correct?

A: Yes, I never use the term rope, everything is line to me.

Q: So when you are thinking of rope you use the word line; is that correct?

A: Right.

Q: Have you ever seen line such as that which is shown in this Grand Jury Exhibit No. 39?

A: Yes.

Q: Where?

A: At the ranch.

Q: Spahn Ranch?

A: Right.

Q: Have you ever heard of a place named Jack Frost?

A: Yes.

Q: Where is that located?

A: It is in Santa Monica.

Q: What type of a store is it?

A: War surplus.

Q: Did you ever go to Jack Frost with Charlie Manson?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: In the summer of '69?

A: Yes.

Q: What month?

A: June.

Q: Did Manson buy anything at the store in your presence?

A: Yes, he did.

Q: What did he buy?

A: He bought two walkie-talkies, two field battle phones, Second World War ones where you lay the wire out and you clang it and ring a bell. He bought two of those. He bought five plastic five-gallon gas containers.

Q: Did he buy any rope?

A: Yeah, this is what he bought. He bought that line.

Q: He bought some line?

A: Right.

Q: Was the line that he bought exactly, the same as that which is shown in this photograph, Grand Jury Exhibit No. 39 for identification?

A: That is the line exactly.

Q: The line that he bought, what material was it?

A: It was made out of nylon.

Q: How many strands was it; if you recall?

A: Three strands.

Q: How much did he buy? How much line did he buy in terms of feet, to your knowledge?

A: One hundred and fifty, two hundred feet.

Q: You were present at that time?

A: Yes, I was.

Q: You later saw the line out at the Spahn Ranch; is that correct?

A: Yes, they used it to tow the dune buggies. When the dune buggy was broken they used the line to tow it.

MR. BUGLIOSI: No further questions.

THE FOREMAN: Are there any questions any members of the Grand Jury would like to ask the witness?

I would like to give you the following admonition:

You are admonished not to discuss or impart at any time outside of this Jury Room the questions that have been asked of you in regard to this matter, or your answers, until authorized by this Grand Jury or the Court to discuss or impart such matters.

You will understand that a violation of these instructions on your part may be the basis for a charge against you of contempt of court.

This admonition, of course, does not preclude you from discussing your legal rights with any legally-employed attorney, should you feel that your own personal rights are in any way in jeopardy.

You may be excused.

MR. BUGLIOSI: Mr. Foreman, I would like to have him come back later this afternoon to testify on the LaBianca aspect of the case.

Could you excuse him just outside the room but not --

THE FOREMAN: I will excuse you and you will be called back this afternoon.

THE WITNESS: All right, sir.

THE FOREMAN: We will recess now and we will be back at 1:00 o'clock.