That Dude's Jacket is Made of Pubic Hair. That Dead Guy's Pubic Hair is Gone. The Pube Jacket Guy is Part of a Murderous Gang that Was Hanging Around There.
The authorities didn't see a connection.
Bill Vance had a jacket made of human pubic hair. He was an associate of a gang that committed the most notorious murders in American history in August 1969 but weren’t arrested until November 1969. In October 1969, a man was found dead with almost all his pubic hair gone. Vance and the murderous gang had been in the area the night the man died.
The authorities ruled it a suicide.
Witnesses who saw the man the day he died said he seemed normal, not remotely suicidal. He had no history of mental illness.
The authorities ruled it a suicide.
On the day the man died, authorities saw another associate of the gang driving the dead man’s car and, later, two hunters saw a man climbing out of the car after someone dumped it into a nearby ravine.
The authorities still ruled it a suicide.
They found his corpse in a motel with an empty handle of whiskey and a second handle 2/3rds gone. The corpse’s BAL was only .03%, a level that wouldn’t be drunk driving in the most Baptistity of Baptist counties.
The authorities still ruled it a suicide.
And, 55 years later, they continue to clutch onto that belief like a devoted wife who believes her husband is faithful after her fourth round of chlaymdia treatments.
Welcome to Southern California during its multi-month murder spree in late 1969. People were showing up dead in obvious patterns but skilled detectives were suddenly less capable of connecting dots than a palsied drunk.
Questions, questions, and more questions. Never answered. The official narrative the Manson murders has been proven wrong, but we still don’t know what happened.
American history, especially since 1945, is a riddle wrapped in a mystery administered with a jagged enema. From the bizarre facts immediately following JFK’s murder to how the f’ we had a human hologram for a president from 2020 to 2024, from MK Ultra to the (literally) unbelievable bungling of the COVID crisis, from skyrocketing autism to the overweight Oompa-Loompas who waddle around our playgrounds.
The bald eagle shouldn’t be our country’s emblem. It should be the Riddler from the Batman comics.
People have for years wondered about these things, but they were made to feel like freaky losers for thinking about them so they just kept their thoughts buried like bodies in Pogo the Clown’s crawl space.
As a result, the book of riddles stayed shut.
And then came the Internet. And podcasts. The new media.
Suddenly, those freaky losers realized they weren’t freaks. It’s like they had been made to feel abnormal for being attracted to curvaceous blonds, then realized, “Hey! Lots of guys dig chicks like that.”
They suddenly realized that asking common-sense questions didn’t categorically disqualify them from enjoying the conjugal society of a normal woman. They could still get laid after asking outloud, “If a dead guy with all his pubic hair gone shows up, and a known murderer with a pubic hair jacket was in the area that night, shouldn’t the pube guy be a suspect, and if he wasn’t made a suspect, why not?”
Those freaky losers are now a major force in American politics, especially on the Right, and it’s causing a civil war among conservatives.
Some conservatives (the "freaky losers) are asking these questions and want answers. The other conservatives deride them for asking these questions.
I’m not officially taking sides here, but I have two questions of my own: Who would have the power to suppress all those riddles for 75 years? Who could coordinate Washington, New York, Hollywood, and, for a short spell at least, Silicon Valley to suppress information, squelch discussion, bamboozle everyone and then gaslight the frick out of everything without much fearing the consequences?
It’s the Establishment, of course, but that doesn’t get us far, so the freaky losers want to know: who is this “Establishment” that’s creating all these riddles and demanding we not try to answer them?
And if their opponents on the Right say those questions ought not be asked, doesn’t that imply they are part of the Establishment—an “Establishment asset”?
It’s virtually undeniable that Charles Manson was an Establishment asset, just as Jeffrey Epstein was. Does that put these conservatives who don’t want these questions asked in the same class as Manson and Epstein: Establishment assets?
Just more questions. You can deride the freaky losers for wanting to know, but they’re legitimate questions. And if they’re not legitimate questions because they can’t be answered, then the freaky losers deserve to understand why they can’t be answered.
And around we go, in circles until we’re dizzy with all the information, then stumble backwards down a rabbit hole.
It sucks.
No sane person wants to go down a rabbit hole, so I kinda question the sanity of the freaky losers who work themselves into podcast frenzies over it.
But as long as we have Establishment narratives telling us the rabbit holes don’t exist and kicking dirt over them, we’re going to have spelunkers going down them.
The public hair jacket narrative is lifted from the last chapter of Tom O’Neill’s Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA, and the Secret History of the Sixties.