Talk:Mary Brunner

dead links
Needs fixing. HammerFilmFan (talk) 18:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC) HammerFilmFan

This website makes it sound like they were searching for young woman only? if this was true tex would have never been involved in the murder — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.25.8.115 (talk) 05:06, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Mistake in geography, location of Little Sycamore Canyon not in Santa Clara, California
Regarding the following inaccurate text from the Mary Brunner article:

"On April 21, 1968 Brunner and eight other Family members, including: Manson, Ella Jo Bailey, Dianne Lake, Nancy Pitman, Susan Atkins, Bruce Vann Hall, Marcus John Arneson, Stephanie Rowe and several others were arrested by sherriff's deputies in Little Sycamore Canyon, Santa Clara, California after they were found sprawled nude around a campfire beside a 1952 bus that had been reported stolen in San Francisco on April 12."

The location of Little Sycamore Canyon is in Ventura County, California, near the Los Angeles County line, not as stated in Santa Clara, California, which is 350 miles to the north near San Francisco. Little Sycamore Canyon is in the Santa Monica Mountains by U.S. Highway 1, (aka as the Pacific Coast Highway) and to the west of Malibu. The arrest mug shot of Charles Manson used by Time magazine was taken by the Ventura County Sheriff's Department on April 22, 1968, the day after the date of their arrest on April 21, 1968, which is stated in the above sentence.

Go to the following URL and click on "map", the map can be navigated by clicking inside the map and moving around with the mouse.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/0-Little-Sycamore-Canyon-Rd-Malibu-CA-90265/2118131789_zpid/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linstrum (talk • contribs) 00:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

See the Ventura County SO (SO=Sheriff's Office) mug shot, where the date of April 22 1968 is just visible at the bottom of the photo at the URL:

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=charles+Manson+mug+shot+1968&hl=en&newwindow=1&sa=X&biw=1209&bih=874&tbm=isch&prmd=imvnso&tbnid=h_PmZPF0YtPzMM:&imgrefurl=http://obaudoedu.blogspot.com/2011/08/o-assassinato-de-sharon-tate.html&imgurl=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-s9i8aB_U2Fc/TkFQXR4gDzI/AAAAAAAAK30/bEaTpgVRgbk/s1600/charles-manson-mugshot-image-thesun-uk1.jpg&w=380&h=463&ei=P_dDUJ7qFs3qiQKzi4DAAg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=130&vpy=179&dur=2487&hovh=248&hovw=203&tx=144&ty=269&sig=116444030069886517142&page=1&tbnh=165&tbnw=143&start=0&ndsp=23&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0,i:77

Linstrum (talk) 00:25, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * OK...so, correct it. ExRat (talk) 15:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I just came across this weird error, too, and fixed it. Facsimiles of the _LA Times_ article of 4/24[23?]/1968, "Nine Nude Hippies Arrested; Found Huddled Near Bonfire", are widely published.  Of course, no mention of Santa Clara (or even of Santa Clarita, a common confusion) are made at all.  This error is copied in a number of places on the web, sadly.  The Times article mentions "Deercreek Mountain Road, just above Bass Rock ... a quarter mile east of Highway 1" but I believe this has always been "Deer Creek Road"; it's Deer Creek Canyon Park.   Rt3368 (talk) 01:09, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Issues with the article.
Living people are entitled to privacy. Identifying a person who does not want to be identified as residing in a certain place as specifically as is done here against policy. And the source appears to be not good. What I took out is against BLP policy as far as I can see.Overagainst (talk) 14:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Overagainst, you took out a reference to an open-source book. Wikipedia protects people's privacy, but it doesn't hide public data. Your edit doesn't really make sense either, because the source is used in 3 other places. The statement that she has changed her name helps no one determine her new name. The statement that she lives in Eau Claire really helps no one find her now since lacking her name, going to a city of 70,000 people without a name to start with is going to get you nowhere. The article was fine before the changes you made.Brownwn (talk) 15:38, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The reference I can see for the removed detail are About.com article by Charles Montaldo who seems to be a fairly active net writer on crime, but he doesn't cite his sources so the article would not be sufficient ref for anything contentious. All this is beside the point however. Not surprisingly, Montaldo a licensed private detective, makes no mention I can see of the BLP information I removed. The other ref is a dead link. So not only is that detail intrusive BLP, it is unreferenced.Overagainst (talk) 17:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Brownwn, Firstly my deletion of what I think is BLP was I think reasonable while the matter is under discussion, because if it does not belong in the article on BLP grounds you can't give the information on the Talk page. (and this is not my interpretation it's policy). Your comments can argue the point without mentioning the detail, if you succeed in getting the detail accepted fine but until then the actual detail does not belong in Talk. And youBrownwn did not just reverse the limited deletion I made to your comment, you took out my entire comment (above, in which I pointed out there are no references for the detail) and reverted the page to before it was made. And you didn't bother making a comment of your own. My original rejoinder comment is back now.  Moreover you have failed to disput my assertion that the detail is not in the referenced source,  and you have failed to  provide any new alternative source as reference for the detail, hence that detail which is now in the article has no source  which coulkd be used as a proper reference.


 * To repeat: the references currently for the detail are [17] and [22] which consist of About.com article which makes no mention I can see of the BLP information I removed. The other ref is a dead link. I must insist that you provide a good reference for the detail we certainly can't have contentious BLP without references left in the article, and my understanding of policy is it ought to be immediately removed. The onus is on you to immediately provide a ref for that BLP detail you have put in the article.Overagainst (talk) 10:31, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mary Brunner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://charliemanson.com/beausoleil.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://charliemanson.com/beausoleil.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100628225209/http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=484-502.9 to http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=484-502.9

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

TMZ mugshot
Mary Brunner was arrested in 2017 at age 73, according to TMZ's site? --> https://www.tmz.com/photos/2017/01/04/manson-family-then-now/images/2017/01/04/mary-brunner-now-jpg <-- can anyone confirm this? The photo certainly bears an uncanny resemblance in many respects to her younger self. HammerFilmFan (talk) 19:55, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Interview
Interview with her son from the LA Times. Contains some details not in the article. -- Green  C  20:00, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

discrepancy as to who was the second member of the family.
Not sure which is correct, but reporting in that I was reading the page on Squeaky Fromme which claims she was the second member of the Family and then clicked over to this page which claims the same for Brunner. Flyingratchet (talk) 06:10, 5 December 2023 (UTC)


 * ...or now that I think about it, I may have gotten confused by the first paragraph in the Fromme article which may be written in a way as to not include Manson as the first member of the family, when it states that Fromme was the second. Flyingratchet (talk) 06:19, 5 December 2023 (UTC)