CHARLES MANSON’S REAL MOTIVE FOR HIS CULT MURDERS

When you read the words “cult” and “murders” in the same line, you’ll evoke evil images of Charles Manson motivating his murderous hippie cult to commit Helter Skelter—an apocalyptic race war between blacks and whites. The picture of wild-eyed Manson with a swastika carved in his forehead, and the sight of his head-shaven girls occupying the courthouse steps, seared themselves into American criminal history. Charles Manson is finally dead, but his memory lives on in villainous infamy. However, Charles Manson’s real motive for his cult murders wasn’t Helter Skelter. That’s bullshit. Pure bullshit. But Manson’s true motive always remained shrouded in secrecy—until now.

During the summer of 1969, Charles Manson’s cult of social misfits and rebellious rejects went on a homicidal rampage in the greater Los Angeles area. At least ten innocent victims lost their lives. The high-profile Manson family mass-murders claimed actress Sharon Tate and her celebrity friends who were shot, strangled and stabbed to death. Business people Rosemary and Leno LaBianca fell as well to Manson-ordered, cult-wielding knives. Charles Manson was also directly responsible for three or more individual murders associated with Manson’s criminal enterprise.

Throughout the Manson Family murder trial, district attorney and prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi pleaded a case that Charles Manson masterminded the Tate and LaBianca murders, although Manson wasn’t hands-on during the killings. Bugliosi argued Manson exercised totalitarian mind control over his cult members and convinced them to commit murder on his behalf.

Manson’s motive, Bugliosi offered, was Charles Manson proclaimed he was the reincarnation of a Jesus-like messiah who’d rule the world following an inevitable race war between blacks and whites. Manson called this Helter Skelter. Bugliosi’s case rested on the motive theory that Manson organized the Tate and LaBianca murders to frame the Black Panther movement and start his imaginary race Armageddon.

Bugliosi claimed Manson’s convoluted motive was personal gain and control after Helter Skelter occurred. Helter Skelter was a term Charles Manson adopted from the Beatles White Album that Manson claimed described the race war and its fallout. There’s no doubt from the trial evidence that Manson preached Helter Skelter to his cult, and they took it hook, line and sinker. The Helter Skelter motive theory was enough to convince a jury to convict Manson and six family members of first-degree murder, sending them to death row. Their capital sentences were eventually reduced to life in prison where many still remain.

Now, after nearly 50 years, the theory of Charles Manson’s bizarre Helter Skelter motive no longer stands the sniff test. It’s nonsense, and Manson knew it. As a clever and cunning con man, Manson didn’t believe his own bullshit. He had a much different motive for ordering his followers to carry out the Tate and LaBianca slayings. Charles Manson’s real motive for his cult murders was to cover-up another crime.

Charles Manson’s Criminal Background

If ever there was someone born to be a career criminal, it was Charles Manson. His birth mother was a disturbed teenager from Cincinnati, Ohio. There’s doubt about who Manson’s biological father was, but he took the surname Manson from a man who married his mother while she was still pregnant. The name on his birth certificate was Charles Milles Maddox after his biological mother’s maiden name.

Manson’s mother spent his childhood years revolving in and out of jail. She was a destitute alcoholic, and Manson bounced between her relatives. He relocated to an aunt’s home in Charleston, West Virginia and then to another aunt’s place in Indianapolis. By age ten, Charles Manson was already incorrigible. He was caught breaking into a house and stealing a gun.

At twelve, Manson was incarcerated in a Terre Haute, Indiana juvenile delinquent home. He escaped and survived by living on the streets of Indianapolis. Now Manson graduated from break-ins to stealing cars. By his 14th birthday, Charles Manson was sentenced to five years in a Nebraska prison for armed robbery.

Manson had a rough go in the penitentiary. He was a little man with big little-man syndrome. Even as an adult, Charles Manson only stood 5’ 2” and weighed 125 lbs. Much larger prisoners repeatedly raped and sodomized tiny Manson. He developed a defense mechanism that would be a lifelong trademark. Charles Manson pretended to be crazy, and the act worked for him.

Manson got paroled in 1954 and moved to Ohio. Soon, he was back into stealing cars and took one for a ride to Los Angeles. He supported himself through thefts, break-ins and robberies but found time to get a girl pregnant and marry her. Manson also learned to make extra money by pimping-out his new wife.

In 1956, Charles Manson was back in the federal prison system for another five-year stint. This time he was psychologically evaluated and deemed to aggressively antisocial. His prison IQ test scored 119 with the national average being 100. The shrinks said there was nothing crazy about Charles Manson. In fact, he was quite bright.

Manson conned his way into early parole. He was out by 1958 and practicing a new trade which he’d learned from the pros in prison. Charles Manson began assembling a harem and lived off the avails of prostitution. He’d realized it was easier and safer to get others to commit crimes for him.

But, like other criminal ventures Charles Manson tried, he got caught again when one of the girls turned on him. As well, Manson had been kiting bad checks which was a federal offense. Manson was back in the pen in 1959.—this time for a ten-year sentence.

Manson’s Musical, Scientology and Carnegie Influence

Charles Manson played the prison system well. He used the crazy act when convenient but also took some schooling. Another psychiatric assessment identified Manson’s “tremendous drive to call attention to himself”. By accident or design, Manson was cellmates with the infamous bank robber, Alvin Karpis. It was Karpis who taught Charles Manson to play the guitar.

Manson learned several more skills in prison. He became an astute student of Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friends and Influence People. Manson also studied Scientology. Persuading people and gathering large groups became Charles Manson’s burning desire. His intent upon freedom was to use his musical aptitude, his charm and his con-man conversion skills to gather a female following. Originally, Manson’s game was nothing more than a front for a profitable prostitution ring and a try at building a music audience.

In 1967, Manson made parole again. Now he was in Washington State where he’d been transferred within the federal system. The timing was right for strands of fate to align and begin building Charles Manson’s deadly hippie cult. He moved to San Francisco.

This was the “summer of love” and the peak of the California counter-culture of hippies and freeloaders centered in San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury district. Many of the hippies were disenchanted girls from broken homes or strict families. The hippie lifestyle of sex, drugs and rock n’ roll was uber-attractive to these vulnerable kids. It was the perfect position for a perverted predator like Charles Manson to exploit.

Manson arrived in San Francisco at the height of the hippie movement. Now, he had two distinct and definite purposes. One was to start a prostitution ring. The other was to build a music career. Manson was smart enough to know he needed a following for both goals. He put his guitar, Carnegie and Scientology skills to work and assembled his family.

The Manson Family Cult Members

Today, most of the main Manson Family members are household names. Everyone knows about Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme who tried to assassinate President Gerald Ford. And, of course, Susan “Sadie” Atkins is well known. So are Patricia Krenwinkel, Leslie Van Houten, Linda Kasabian, Mary Bruner and Diane Lake.

Although Manson’s intention was to build a female following, there were a few young men who joined the family. Noteworthy were Charles “Tex” Watson, Steve “Clem” Grogan, Bruce Davis and a good-looking young guy by the name of Bobby Beausoleil. All four would eventually go down for murders orchestrated by Charles Manson.

Looking at the Manson Family objectively, it wasn’t Charles Manson’s original intention to build a cult. His big drive was to be famous through music, and he needed a built-in audience to attract a record label. Manson was fascinated by the Beatles’ success and their music. He intended to follow their path. The cult-thing was an accidental by-product of his grandiose delusion of stardom.

A cult can be either destructive or non-destructive. Generally, a cult is an organization of followers with a charismatic leader who preaches false information. Scientology is clearly a cult, but they don’t seem to go around killing people. The Charles Manson Family did. They were about as destructive a cult as you can find.

You’ve got to give Charles Manson some credit for both drive and balls. While in prison with Karpis, Manson got a lead on a Los Angeles record producer named Phil Kaufman who Karpis knew from the outside. Kaufman was business partners with the influential recording producer, Terry Melcher, who was Doris Day’s son. Melcher was also the producer for big names like the Beach Boys, Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young and the Mommas and Poppas.

Charles Manson amassed about 100 followers who he plied with psychedelic drugs and mesmerized their strung-out brains with messiah-like preaching about Beatle song interpretations. He gained his audience in San Francisco but knew the music action was in L.A. In 1969, Manson packed up the family and headed south. He tracked down Terry Melcher and talked his way into Melcher’s home at 10050 Cielo Drive in north Los Angeles. This was the home Sharon Tate was about to occupy.

Terry Melcher wasn’t impressed with Manson’s musical talent, but he took an interest in Manson’s personality. Melcher never outright turned Manson down for a record deal. He encouraged Manson to keep writing, practicing and building an audience. Manson took Melcher’s advice to heart, and did just that.

Manson and the Beach Boys

Charles Manson’s big musical break came by total fluke. Dennis Wilson of the Beach Boys picked up two of Manson’s girls who were hitchhiking. Seeing them as an easy sexual mark, Wilson took the girls back to his Los Angeles mansion and had his way. Once the two returned to the family and told Manson about the encounter, Charles Manson saw a tremendous opportunity. He had the audacity to take 20 of his female followers and invade Wilson’s house.

Tempted by unlimited sex, Dennis Wilson let the Manson Family stay until they wore out their welcome a few months later. By then, Manson and his followers sponged tens of thousands of dollars off Wilson and his associates. The Wilson connection gave Manson access to big names like Neil Young who Manson had many jam-sessions with.

In the spring of 1969, Manson was going nowhere in his music world and his grip on his cult was loosening. People dropped off and recruiting was slow now that the counter-culture revolution had run its course. Manson wasn’t interested in retaining men, but he did everything to hang onto women. They were still his bread and butter. That continued to work as long as he supplied them with drugs and continued to make them feel valued.

One thing about running a cult is that it’s hard work. It takes a lot of supplies and energy to keep up the charade. Manson constantly needed to take his game to a higher step to retain control. He did this by preaching Helter Skelter, and it worked.

By now, Charles Manson had convinced his hard-core followers that he was a messiah—the “Son of Man”. He played on their fears and hopes where he predicted a race war between blacks and whites where the blacks would kill all the whites and then turn to the Manson Family for leadership. This was all bullshit, of course, and Manson knew it.

However, this Helter Skelter nonsense acted as glue for the family and they bought it. To buy time while he pursued other music leads, Charles Manson upped his preaching game. He also upped his LSD and methamphetamine supply. For that, they needed money, and this got Manson in a pickle.

The Start of the Manson Family Murders

After Manson and the family left Dennis Wilson’s place they couch surfed, leaching off whoever would tolerate them. One place was next door to 3301 Waverly Drive in north Los Angeles—the home of Rosemary and Leno LaBianca. After that brief stay, Manson found an old movie set called the Spahn Ranch in the desert northwest of L.A.

Manson paid his rent to eighty-year-old George Spahn in sexual favors performed by his girls. With this new spot and its remote location, Manson now had more control over who was coming and going in the family. One of the newcomers was a 21-year-old wanna-be musician, Bobby Beausoleil.

Charles Manson was under constant pressure to fund his family. It took money to pay for drugs, food and vehicles that the Manson Family required. Most of their money came from prostitution, drug trafficking and petty theft. From that, they barely scraped by. Charles Manson saw an opportunity and hatched a plan for a big money score.

One of Manson’s musical acquaintances was Gary Hinman who was a quiet and well-educated man. Hinman found Manson and his followers interesting but had no desire to join them. Manson heard a rumor that Hinman recently acquired a large inheritance, so Manson sent Bobby Beausoleil and Susan Atkins to check it out.

Gary Hinman knew Beausoleil and Atkins. He willingly let them in. Both Atkins and Beausoleil were drugged and unstable. When they approached Hinman to join their family, he again declined. The conversation turned to money, and Hinman put his foot down. It turned ugly. The Manson Family members took Hinman hostage and began torturing him.

Beausoleil phoned Manson back at the ranch and told him they weren’t getting anywhere with Hinman. They asked for Manson’s direction. Manson told Atkins and Beausoleil to keep Hinman tied up till he got there. Once Manson arrived, he took over, cutting Hinman’s ear off to set an example.

Hinman still refused to give in. In frustration, Manson took Atkins and left—telling Beausoleil, “You know what to do.” Manson also told Beausoleil to make the scene look like the Black Panthers were involved, reminding Beausoleil of the apocalyptic doom of Helter Skelter.

Bobby Beausoleil took that as a clear signal and authorization from his leader—Charles Manson—to kill Gary Hinman. With Manson gone, Bobby Beausoleil stabbed Hinman to death while Hinman stayed tied to a chair. Beausoleil then wrote “Pig” on the front door in Hinman’s blood as well as leaving a bloody paw print which was the Black Panther symbol.

Beausoleil was drugged, fatigued and not thinking straight. He stole Hinman’s car, hid the knife in the trunk and drove from the scene. Within hours, the police found Bobby Beausoleil asleep in Hinman’s stolen car. His clothes were bloody and so was the murder weapon still in the trunk. The police backtracked, found Hinman’s body and charged Bobby Beausoleil with first-degree murder.

Charles Manson Plans the Tate & LaBianca Murders

Beausoleil’s arrest worried Charles Manson. He was concerned—really concerned—that Bobby Beausoleil would crack, squeal and implicate Charles Manson as a murder accomplice. That got the wheels turning in Manson’s head, and his convoluted logic kicked in.

Charles Manson calculated that if similar murders occurred with a modus operandi (MO) like what Beausoleil did to Hinman, then the police would have to conclude the real killers were still out there. Therefore, they’d have to drop the charges, release Bobby Beausoleil and the heat would be off Charles Manson.

Manson figured he’d put his other family members to work by casing out locations and finding suitable murder victims. He knew he could convince his most-trusted lieutenants who accepted his Helter Skelter prophesies. Manson gathered them and said it was now time to start Helter Skelter. He said nothing about covering up the botched Gary Hinman murder.

The first place Manson targeted was 10050 Cielo Drive. Manson knew Terry Melcher moved out. In fact, Manson came face-to-face with Sharon Tate when he went looking for Melcher one day. Manson picked Tate’s residence for two reasons. One was he knew that celebrity murders would get a lot of attention. Secondly, Manson was familiar with the layout.

On the night of August 8, 1969 Charles Manson instructed Tex Watson to take Susan Atkins, Patricia Krenwinkel and Linda Kasabian and kill everyone inside 10050 Ceilo Drive. Manson also directed them to make the scene look like a Black Panther attack by writing bloody messages on the walls. He implicitly said this was the start of Helter Skelter and it was their privilege to carry it out.

The drug-fueled cult members bought every word of it. Without going into graphic details, the Manson Family members cold-bloodedly killed Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Abagail Folger, Voytec Frykowski and an innocent visitor named Steve Parent.

One mass killing wasn’t good enough for Charles Manson. The next night, Manson accompanied the same murderous group to the LaBianca house on Waverly Drive. This time he took along Leslie Van Houten and Clem Grogan. Again, Manson didn’t get his hands bloody. He picked the LaBianca home simply because he knew the layout and that they were wealthy. Once Manson located the home, he left and the Manson Family cult members went in for the kill.

Bit by bit, Manson’s grip on his cult slipped away. It took a while for the police to connect the Tate and LaBianca murders and find evidence linking the Manson cult to the crimes. Even when the police raided the Spahn Ranch and arrested Manson and his remaining followers on car theft suspicion, they failed to make any connection to the August murder spree. It wasn’t until Susan Atkins opened her mouth in jail that the cat came out of the bag.

Many of the Manson Family members testified at the Tate and LaBianca murder trials. Each one attributed the motive to Charles Manson’s Helter Skelter vision. One can’t blame them for revealing this as the motive because that’s what they honestly believed. Only Charles Manson knew his real motive for his cult killings. That’s a secret Manson took to the grave with him.

*   *   *

I’m not making up this theory about Charles Manson’s real motive for his cult murders. Vincent Bugliosi is on the record for purporting the Gary Hinman murder connection as the real reason why Manson ordered the Tate and LiBianca “copy-cat” killings. It makes sense when you think about it.

Charles Manson was a psychopath, but he wasn’t psychotic. He was a shrewd little con-man and a calculating criminal. His entire MO was using people to commit criminal acts, and his cult following—which was supposed to be a Beatles-like fan club—got carried away into one of the most notorious murder cases in history. It was all about covering up a crime gone bad.

If you’re interested in a fascinating look at how Charles Manson built and controlled his cult, I suggest reading a 2015 undergraduate honors thesis by Robin Altman of the University of Colorado, Boulder. It’s titled Sympathy for the Devil: Charles Manson’s Exploitation of California’s 1960 Counter-Culture. It also concludes Manson’s motive for the Tate & LaBianca murders was to cover up Bobby Beausoleil’s blotched job and isolate Manson.

HOW COPS HARASS CITIZENS — THE WETASKIWIN, ALBERTA WAY

Police harassment is a serious issue. No one wants to be hassled by the cops. That’s true, but the vast number of contacts between the police and the public are really good. However, there’re rare times where some cops overstep their civil boundaries and exercise questionable behavior when dealing with citizens. Then, there’s time for fun.

Most police harassment complaints are trumped up or leave something out about what started the conflict. Over my years in policing, I can honestly say I never saw a case where an officer intentionally went overboard without there being some sort of provocation on a citizen’s part. Maybe that’s because I’m from Canada where we’ve got polite policing down to a science—especially our red-coated Mounties who start reading suspect rights with a “Sorry”.

I won’t say legitimate police harassment doesn’t happen. But, I will say there’re usually two sides to a story. Speaking of stories, I got a laugh the other day when a friend shipped me a letter from Wetaskiwin’s local newspaper. For those who’ve never heard of Wetaskiwin, it’s a small town 40 miles south of Edmonton, in the Province of Alberta in western Canada. Like so many Canadian prairie towns, Wetaskiwin has the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) maintaining their right.

They’ve also got an RCMP Sergeant with a great sense of humor. Part of the Wetaskiwin, Alberta RCMP detachment’s community service is maintaining a newspaper crime page. This article was so bang-on that I had to steal the content and post it on DyingWords. With no apologies for plagiarism or copyright invasion, here’s how the good Sergeant replied to this reader question:

 “I’d like to know how it’s possible for police officers to continually harass people and get away with it?”

Sergeant Dooright: “First off, let me tell you this—it ain’t easy. In Wetaskiwin and rural surrounding areas, we average one cop for every 505 people. Only about 60 percent of our cops are on general duty (or what you might refer to as “general patrols”). This is where we do most of our harassing.

The rest are in non-harassing units that don’t allow them to contact with day to day innocents. And, at any given moment, only one-fifth of the 60 percent of general patrols are on duty and available for harassing people. The rest are off duty. They don’t want to be bothered harassing people on their own time.

So, roughly, one cop is responsible for regularly harassing about 6000 permanent residents at any given time. When you toss in the commercial business and tourist locations that attract people from other areas, sometimes you got a situation where a single cop is responsible for harassing 15,000 people a day. Or maybe even more.

Consider this—your average cop’s eight-hour shift runs 28,800 seconds long. This gives that cop only two-thirds of a second to harass a person. Then they have just another third of a second to sip a Tim Horton’s coffee, scarf a donut, and then find a new person to harass. This isn’t an easy task. Far from it.

To be honest, most cops aren’t up to the challenge day in and day out. It’s just too tiring. What we do is utilize some trade tools to help narrow down those people we can realistically spend time giving quality harassment.

PHONE: People will call us up and point out things that cause us to focus on a person for special harassment. For example, “My neighbor is beating his wife” is a code phrase often used. This means we’ll come out and give somebody some special harassment. Another popular one is, “There’s a guy breaking into a house.” The harassment team is then put into action.

CARS: We have special cops assigned to harass people who drive. They like to harass the drivers of fast cars, cars with no insurance, or drivers with no licenses and the like. It’s lots of fun when you pick them out of traffic for nothing more obvious than running a red light. Sometimes you get to really heap the harassment on when you find they have drugs in the car, they are drunk or have an outstanding warrant on file.

LAWS: When we don’t have phones or cars and have nothing better to do, there are actually books that give us ideas for reasons to harass folks. They’re called “Statutes”. These include the Crimes Act, Summary Offences Act, Land Transport Act and a whole bunch of others.

Laws spell out all sorts of things for how you can really mess with people. After you read the law, you can just drive around for a while until you find someone violating one of these listed offenses and harass them. Just last week, I saw a guy trying to steal a car. Well, the book says that’s not allowed. That meant I had permission to harass this guy.

It is a really cool system we’ve set up, and it works pretty well. We seem to have a never-ending supply of folks to harass. And we get away with it. Why? Because, for the good citizens who pay the tab, we try to keep the streets safe for them, and they pay us to “harass” some people.

Next time you’re in small-town Wetaskiwin, Alberta, Canada, give me the old “single finger wave”. That’s another one of those codes. It means, “You can harass me.” It’s one of our favorite harassment go-aheads—and I love getting away with it.”

SECRETS OF WRITING BESTSELLING CRIME THRILLERS WITH SUE COLETTA

Every once in a while a bright star emerges—no matter what writing galaxy you’re in. But, they’re never overnight stellars. They’re self-made products with years in craft study, committed practice, unswerving belief in themselves, refusal to give up and respectful networking with humble appreciation. And a few have God-given talent. They make it all work. That’s the secret successful combination bestselling author Sue Coletta tells you about in her travel toward the top of the crime thriller genre.

I met Sue Coletta three years ago—just before her first published book. Sue shipped me a draft of MARRED for my thoughts. I was a page in and stopped. I backed up. Read it again. And I thought, My God! Can this writer write! Today, Sue and I are professional colleagues and personal friends. I watch her progress with awe.

In a short span, Sue Coletta’s produced five fantastic novels and several stand-alones. She’s slain story structure, captured book marketing and mastered social media. Through her plotting, penning and promoting, Sue’s stayed down-to-earth and kept her wicked sense of humor. And despite demands, Sue Coletta still makes time to selflessly share her secrets of writing bestselling crime thrillers—Sue was silly enough to drop in for a DyingWords chat.

*   *   *

Hey, Sue! Great having you back in the DyingWords shack. *locks door* What a coincidence—it happens to jive with the release of your new crime thriller, SCATHED, the Grafton County Series, Book #3. I just finished a non-stop SCATHED read, and I gotta say, “Wow!” I didn’t think it possible to exceed your other novels, but you’re becoming a better writer all the time. *disconnects phone* Tell us about SCATHED. *draws curtains* What’s in it? How’d it come to be?

What’s SCATHED about?

On a picturesque fall morning in Grafton County, New Hampshire, a brutal murder rocks the small town of Alexandria. In the backyard of a weekend getaway cabin, a dead woman is posed in red-satin, with two full-bloomed roses in place of eyes.

In her hand she holds a mysterious envelope addressed to Sheriff Niko Quintano. Inside, Paradox vows to kill again if his riddle isn’t solved within 24 hours.

With so little time and not enough manpower, Niko asks his wife for help. But Crime Writer Sage Quintano is dealing with her own private nightmare. Not only did she find massive amounts of blood on the mountain where she and her family reside, but a phone call from the past threatens her future—the creepy mechanical voice of John Doe, the serial killer who murdered her twin sister.

Together, can Niko and Sage solve the riddle in time to save the next victim? Or will the killer win this deadly game of survival?

—   —   —

The book description doesn’t match the initial story idea. It all started with the Tim McGraw song, “Live Like You Were Dying.” All writers have a weird and wonderful way of coming up with story ideas. This post gives readers a peek into my thought process for SCATHED. Which made perfect sense to me at the time. Not sure anyone who reads the post would agree, but it all worked out in the end.

You flesh your characters so well. In SCATHED, you put Sage and Niko through the wringer, and Paradox is quite the enigma. Your plotting is outstanding. I’m not going to do a spoiler alert about the finale, but I did not see that coming. How do you do such a good job of character and plot building?

I studied story structure for years, and I put that knowledge to work. Here’s a quick overview of the milestones all stories must hit in order to work, regardless of genre …

Hook: Open the novel with a bang. In other words, hook the reader and don’t let go. Force them to flip the page, then the next, and the next after that. The hook is something that creates a question the reader wants answered; doesn’t need context with protagonist’s needs or stakes.

Inciting Incident (optional, but I include it): Game-changing event occurring during Part 1, often leading to a decision at the First Plot Point.

First Plot Point (20% – 25% into the novel): The most important moment in the story, because it kicks off the quest. Something forces the protagonist to act.

First Pinch Point (about 37.5% into the novel): Reminder of the story’s antagonist, not filtered by narrative or protagonist’s description, but directly visible to the reader.

Midpoint (at 50%): New information or awareness that changes the experience or understanding of context for the protagonist and/or reader; a catalyst activating new decisions/actions.

Second Pinch Point (at roughly 62.5%): Reminder of the story’s antagonist, as the antagonist ups the game against the protagonist’s attacks.

All is Lost Moment (optional): A slower paced, all-hope-is-lost lull before the Second Plot Point, where the protagonist feels gutted.

Second Plot Point (placed at 75%): The final injection of new information into the story (doesn’t need to be fully understood by the protagonist yet); protagonist’s quest is accelerated.

As for characterization, the best advice I can give is to slip into your character’s skin. Know your character as well as yourself, then ask three questions …

What’s their public persona? (1st dimension of character; the face they show to the world)

How do they act with friends and family? (2nd dimension of character; the face they show to those closest to them)

If they were trapped in a movie theatre during a fire, would they elbow their way through the crowd, or would they help others escape the blaze? (3rd dimension of character; their true character — who they are when the shit hits the fan.)

This is called the three dimensions of character. By fleshing out these questions, we’re able to create living, breathing human beings, with hopes, fears, worldviews, religious beliefs, phobias, dreams, plans for the future, etc. We don’t show all these things of course, but we should still know the answers. I even listen to their favorite music to help get into character.

No doubt you’ve got a Grafton County Series #4 in mind. What’s happening on that front?

Book 4 is all planned out. It’s sitting on the back burner to cool while I finish writing Silent Mayhem, Mayhem Series, Book 3.

Okay. Let’s talk shop, and hear some crafty wisdom from crime writer Sue Coletta. I know you’re a big plotster rather than a pantster. Tell us about your story structure philosophy.

Whoops. Jumped the gun on this question. It’s answered above.

“Point of View”. We could go on all day about POV techniques. I see you used two POVs in SCATHED. Sage Qunitano, your protagonist, is in 1st, and the other POV characters are in 3rd. How did you get the combination to work so well?

Point of View is another style choice. I’ve always written my stories with dueling protagonists, so it’s become second nature. The main squeeze, so to speak, I write in 1st person. The others I write in deep 3rd. How do I get the combination to work? Practice makes perfect. Hahaha.

Okay, serious answer… By narrowing my focus to one POV character per scene — which is a writing “rule” — I experience their surroundings as if I’m inside their body. Anything they can’t hear, see, taste, smell, feel, must go. No exceptions. When we ground the reader in the character’s point of view, it doesn’t matter if we write in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or a combination of all three. They’ll go along for the ride.

While we’re on the POV subject, you use a lot of what’s called “Deep Point of View”. Tell us how you pull that off.

Asked and answered, Your Honor.

What’s your thoughts about how important “Show vs Tell” is? After all, most people would say you actually tell a story rather than show it.

Actually, we show and tell a story. Showing comes into play when we write from one character’s perspective and only one character’s perspective per scene. A new scene means we can switch to a different character’s perspective as long as we remain consistent. I should add, it’s best not to have too many POV characters to avoid confusion. I usually limit mine to three, rotating the POV characters between chapters to create a rhythm to the overall story.

Telling also has its place in a story. If we showed each and every detail, the final page count would grow exponentially. Let’s say we need to transition through time. After all, if nothing interesting happens, then there’s no need to bore the reader.

Example: Three hours later, I was on my knees in the driveway, scrubbing blood off the bumper of my 1967 Corvette.

Voice. I think your voice is so strong in your writing. How would you describe “Voice”, and how do you know when you’ve found it?

*blush* Thank you. Voice is one of those elusive things that’s almost impossible to define. A writer’s voice is as unique as their fingerprints. Voice is the combination of syntax, diction, punctuation, dialogue, sentence rhythm, and character development across their entire body of work. Just as a flute doesn’t sound like a clarinet, neither does one writer from another.

But it’s more than that.

By remaining true to our characters in dialogue as well as in the narrative, by our use of syntax, diction, punctuation, dialogue, pace, and sentence rhythm, combined with our ability to write beyond our comfort level and share our demons, our past, our life experience as a whole, by writing “in the zone” with authenticity and honesty throughout our career, with consistency, by daring to reach into the darkest recesses of our soul and spill our darkest fears, joy, sorrow, pain, hopes and dreams on the page, our distinct writing voice blossoms. Thus, voice is an extension of our truest self.

How about the black cloud of “Head-Hopping”? Does the average reader really recognize it, or is head-hopping one of those rules that gurus, rather than writers, preach?

It depends on if we’re talking true head-hopping or an omniscient POV. Which is an important distinction, I think. Head-hopping causes confusion, because the reader doesn’t know whose head they’re in half the time. With an omniscient POV, the character who’s thinking, hearing, seeing, smelling, feeling, is clear. Years ago, I went to a Mystery Writers of America conference and the class instructor insisted omniscient POV was the only way to tell the full story. Not true. There’s no right or wrong way to tell a story. Years ago, most writers used omniscient narrators, so I’m not about to critique the classics. I will say, writers do need to learn the “rules” of storytelling before we break them, though.

Head-hopping is problematic for several reasons …

  • It confuses the reader;
  • The storyline doesn’t focus on one character at a time;
  • Tends to go hand-in-hand with on-the-nose dialogue;
  • It distances the reader from the character;
  • Lacks emotion;
  • Often there’s author intrusion, where the author inserts facts that haven’t been unearthed in a natural way.

An omniscient narrator has two main problem areas …

  • It distances the reader from the character;
  • If not done well, it slips into head-hopping.

You effectively used a prologue in SCATHED. *Reader Alert* (Once you get to the end, you’ll see how important the SCATHED prologue is.) Like you, I’ve read all kinds of pros & cons about prologues. Personally, I have no problem with a good prologue like you used in SCATHED. What’s the trick or tricks to making a prologue effective?

Ah, prologues … I love ‘em. Here again, there are “rules” to follow so the reader doesn’t read the word “prologue” and think it’s all backstory. One of my favorite ways to use a prologue is called a jump cut or scene cut. The prologue starts a scene that takes place later in the story. Chapter One then backtracks — example: three days earlier — and the story unfolds. This device is effective, because the reader gets a peek at what’s in store for the protagonist. The anticipation is almost palpable as they flip pages, waiting to see how it all plays out.

Another great way to use a prologue is by showing the villain killing the first victim. By giving readers a peek at the antagonist and what he or she is capable of, they fear for the protagonist’s safety.

The final way to use a prologue is to show an event that occurred at a different place or time, but only if the past event impacts the present. An example of this is the prologue of MARRED, where I showed Sage and Niko at their baby’s funeral. It’s a gut-wrenching prologue, but it was important to show, as readers soon find out in Chapter One. For those who don’t understand what I mean, read the sample on Amazon.

Date & time prompts and sub-heads. SCATHED is full of them, and I like it. But, many writing wizards scathe others for using prompts. Your view is…?

The gurus say not to date your book, and I agree, unless the date impacts the story in some way. In MARRED, the date was an important factor. For this reason, in subsequent books in the series, I made the date important to the storyline in some way. For example, in SCATHED, the date shows why Sage is overly suspicious, because only months earlier (in CLEAVED) she fell victim to a vicious serial killer. A traumatic experience impacts not only the victim’s life but the victim’s family, as well. The passage of time needed to reflect that.

Now, I’ll always have to use dates in order to remain consistent throughout the Grafton County Series. The biggest problem I’ll face is how to age the dogs, Colt and Ruger. Ruger’s already of advanced age, and limps from arthritis in his wrist. Over time, climbing stairs became difficult for him. Showing the progression of the arthritis isn’t the problem. My biggest obstacle is myself. I adore Ruger — or as Sage calls him, Rugey. The thought of losing him kills me, so he may end up being the oldest living English Mastiff in history. 😉

In my Mayhem Series, I included a date line in Wings of Mayhem before my views changed. But the date wasn’t important to the series as a whole, so I didn’t include a date line in Blessed Mayhem or Silent Mayhem (which I’m still writing). Instead, I wrote, Tuesday, 10 p.m. (no month or year). I do the same with the new series I’m working on.

Pet words or tics. All of us are guilty of this and I make no apology. Something that jumped out in SCATHED was you used the word “hinky”. Where’d you get that? You been hanging around with a bunch of cops, or what? I tried to get away with “hinky’ once, and my editor made me change it to “kinky” — said no one would understand what I meant by “hinky”. But we die-hard crime writers know there’s a big difference. It’s like hinky is using a feather and kinky is using the whole f’n bird, right?

Hahahahahaha! I’d love to tell you a fascinating story behind that word choice, but there isn’t one. My parents used the word a lot — “there’s something hinky going on in that house” — and I’ve been known to toss it around as well, so “hinky” was a natural fit for Sage when a moving truck sputtered past her bedroom window after midnight.

Profanity. *Spoiler Alert* (If the F-Bomb offends you, SCATHED might not be your thing.) You’re no stranger to profanity but, it’s not like your use of profanity is flagrant or inappropriate. IMO, your dialogue is realistic for the genre and characters. Cops, crooks and writers swear all the time. In fact, one Sergeant I worked with made a perfectly grammatically correct sentence using a series of F’s with one conjunction and a noun. IYO, when is profanity acceptable?

Tough question! Dropping the F-bomb is a tricky subject. Like you, I portray my characters as real cops and real killers. To think a cop wouldn’t swear is ridiculous. That said, I do try to keep it to a minimum wherever possible. There isn’t much I can do about Deputy Frankie Campanelli. She’s her own woman. To censor her would ruin her characterization. Although I do try to offset her more colorful language with “effin’” or “frickin’.”

Sage rarely swears. She’s only dropped the F-bomb one time in all three books, and that happened in SCATHED. It wasn’t an easy decision, either, but I did it to show her level of frustration. The F-bomb acted as a slap across her husband’s face. When Niko heard his wife use the F-bomb, it forced him to pay attention.

Sex Scenes. Okay, you caught Frankie Campanelli in the act. What’s your take on writing appropriate sex scenes?

Oy. You had to go there. Thanks, buddy. Here’s my take on sex scenes. Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do. If a sex scene fits with the storyline, crime writers can’t skip over it. But we can get in and out, so to speak, as quickly and painlessly as possible. Next question?

*blush* Ah, yeah, okay, so, ah, like we’ve covered the dirty stuff. Now let’s, let’s tackle some clean shit like… like editing and formatting. What’s your editing process? Who do you have help from? Is it ever okay to self-edit?

Confession time. I have no idea how to format for Kindle vs. print. That’s one of the reasons I wouldn’t be any good at self-publishing. In fact, didn’t you have to write me step-by-step instructions on how to format my 60 Ways to Murder guide in order for me to muddle through it? My publishers handle that aspect for my novels and novellas, thank God.

Self-editing? Absolutely! I’m an edit-as-I-go type of writer. Meaning, I start the day by editing what I wrote the day before. It may not be the popular choice, but I don’t believe our first draft needs to be a mess. Besides, I’d rather not rewrite a gazillion times before the manuscript is ready for submission.

After the initial draft, I use a few different tricks to search for typos and such.

  • Read the work out loud;
  • Change the format; meaning, change the Word doc to pdf and upload to the Kindle app. By changing the format, it tricks the eye to catch words we’d normally miss.
  • Change the font and point. I like to make the font so large that I don’t need to wear reading glasses. Some writers even change the color.

Even with self-editing, my editor catches things I’ve missed. Sometimes even the proofreader misses things as well, and a typo or two will end up in the final version. Eh, what can ya do? We’re only human.

Commas. For the life of me I can, never get comma use right. How about some tips? And, what’s your view of the Oxford/Serial comma?

For those who don’t know, let’s clarify what the Oxford comma is. When used in a list, the comma before the conjunction “and” is called the serial comma aka the Oxford comma or Harvard comma.

Example: The fair served fried dough, corndogs, ice cream, and watermelon. The comma before “and” is the serial comma aka Oxford or Harvard comma.

I’m a fan of the Oxford comma, because it leaves little confusion as to what the writer meant. The Elements of Style and The Chicago Manual of Style are both pro-Oxford comma. As far as I know, its use is also the industry standard. Well, that’s what my editors tell me anyway. As with most things writing, whether to use an Oxford comma is a style choice. The most important thing is consistency.

Comma Tips from a Crime Writer

I use that title because I don’t claim to know all the rules. Hence why we love our editors. Comma use comes naturally after a while, but it does take manuscripts full of red ink in order for the “rules” to sink in. At least it did for me.

For non-lists, add the Oxford comma if the phrase after the conjunction reflects an emotion or reaction. Example: The bear huffed, and I screamed.
Could we skip the comma before “and” and still be clear? Sure. But it reads better with the comma, by inserting a natural pause.
Leave it out when the subject is doing more than one thing. Example: The bear huffed and stomped the ground.
Gerund clauses at the beginning of a sentence need a comma. Example: Judging by his appearance, he didn’t sleep well last night.
Use a comma after an introductory phrase. Example: When he delivered the speech, he held his chin high.
After a clause that begins with “If.” Example: If I keep adding comma tips, this post will be nine pages long. Same rule applies to clauses that begin with “Because” and “Since.”
Add comma before “then.” Example: He read the post, then needed a nap.
Add comma after a phrase that begins with “After.” Example: After he woke from his afternoon nap, he added a shot of whiskey to his coffee.
Add comma before gerund clause. Example: She skipped past the school, whistling at the boys on the jungle gym.
Use a comma to offset a name or title for clarity. Name example: My landlord, Mr. Edwards, peeks through my bedroom window at night. Title example: I loved your new psychological thriller, SCATHED. J

Dialog Tags/Speech Attributes. Looking back through SCATHED, I don’t see many (or maybe any) dialogue tags. What’s your recommendation about how authors should mark who’s saying what?

I use dialogue tags only when I want to show how the character said something, i.e. “he warned.” I also use tags when I want to show how the POV character interpreted what someone else said.

Example from SCATHED …

A switch clicked in my brain as the connection to the hacker became clear. In slow motion, I shielded my gaping mouth. “You don’t think—”

“No, I don’t,” he countered, reading my mind. “And neither should you.”

In the above example, “countered” indicates a quick response; “reading my mind” after the tag shows how Sage, the POV character of the scene, interpreted Niko’s response.

Otherwise, I prefer a body cue or inner dialogue. My advice is to mix it up. Too much of one or the other can ruin the story rhythm. Ultimately, it’s another style choice.

Also, my personal rule for rapid-fire dialogue between two people is to leave out the tag as well as the body cue. But, and this is important, we can’t go too long without either the tag or body cue, or we risk confusing the reader. (ß notice the serial comma before the last “or”? A comma is used because the phrase that follows is a reaction/emotion) To avoid confusion, my personal preference is three or four lines, tops.

Example of rapid-fire dialogue in SCATHED:

Mind whirling with endless possibilities, Niko raised his gaze to Dr. Gaines. [ßbody cue to ground the reader; with this one body cue it’s clear the conversation that follows will be between Niko and Dr. Gaines, with Niko speaking first] “Sorry. What?”

“I said, is the card an invitation of some sort?”

“You could say that, yeah.”

“To where, if I may ask?”

“Nowhere good, Doc. Nowhere good.”

Fonts. Maybe this is a self-pub choice or handled by your traditional publisher, but I noticed my ARC of SCATHED is printed in sans serif. I think most TPs get printed in a serif font like Times New Roman where many SPs have a sans serif font like Ariel. What say you on font effects?

Sorry. That’s out of my wheelhouse. My publisher decides, not me. Interesting question, though. I never noticed SPs had different fonts from TP books. Hmm, I wonder why. Let’s ask the Dying Words community to weigh in on this question. Do you prefer one font over another?

Covers. You have amazing covers thanks to the magnificent Elle J. Rossi (EJR Digital Art). What do you think makes for a great cover?

Isn’t she amazing? She’s done some awesome covers for you, as well.

I’ve learned a lot about covers through trial and error. Mostly, what not to do. For example, CLEAVED’s cover is one of my favorites, but the book doesn’t sell as well as the others at book signings. Why? Even if a reader is die-hard crime thriller fan, there’s something about blood on a cover that turns people off. Go figure.

Covers in a series need to resemble each other. At the same time, they need to be different enough from the other books in the series. This was a hard lesson to learn. Our view of the cover might not match the average reader’s view. The perfect example of this is Wings of Mayhem and Blessed Mayhem. To me, they’re very different covers, but because the colors match, many readers think they’re the same book. At signings, I need to point out that they aren’t. Ah, well. Live and learn.

The sweet spot is the Grafton County Series. Even with the blood on CLEAVED’s cover, a reader can tell right away that the books belong together, yet each cover is distinct.

And then there’s marketing. It strikes me that today, unless you’re a big established name, you’re responsible for your own marketing. What really pays off in book marketing and what’s a waste of time and money?

BookBub is the ultimate. Their email list is so huge that they guarantee a certain number of sales. It’s not cheap. There’s also no guarantee that you’ll score a featured deal. But if you do, it’s well worth the money.

ENT is another great site for sales.

I don’t bother with the nickel-and-dime sites. They’re cheap and sometimes they pay off, but the majority of the time we don’t make our investment back.

Facebook ads work, if you include detailed targeting. Same with BookBub ads, but I haven’t figured out the best way to target their audience. Their algorithm works differently than Facebook. I’ve heard good things about Amazon ads but haven’t tried them yet. Posting to Facebook groups is a PITA, but it’s free and sometimes works for sales. Personally, I limit my posting to Facebook groups so I don’t come off as a spammer. Three groups a couple times per week is enough, IMO. Same with Twitter. I leave a promo post pinned to my timeline, but I may only tweet it once a day. With all social media, we need to follow the 80/20 rule — 80% non-book related; 20% promo. I lean more toward 90/10.

If you have a large marketing budget, International Thriller Writers offers various advertising options, and recommends several crime magazines. Taking out an ad in your local paper works, too, especially if you’ve got a signing coming up in the area.

What can we expect from Sue Coletta in the future? Right now, you have the Mayhem Series and the Grafton County Series. Are you sticking with those books? Or have you some other shive up your sleeve?

I’ll continue to write both series. I’m also adding another series, which I’m really excited about. The series is set in Africa, specifically on the savannah. Can’t say more than that right now. I’d hate to ruin the surprise.

I recall you did some children’s writing some time ago. Ever think of doing true crime, non-fiction or even poetry? I tried poetry once, and it turned out as a limerick about a man from Nantucket that was too vulgar for even Chuck Wendig of Terrible Minds to run. What about doing some script or screenplay writing? Co-writing, maybe?

Over the winter I was offered a co-authored project, but honestly, I doubt I’ll be able to squeeze in another project this year. If Patterson asked, I may be more apt to clear my schedule.

While watching the wildlife play in my yard, I’ve written about nine children’s books in my head. Someday I’ll take the time to write the stories for my grandchildren. As for true crime, I’ve mulled over the possibility. Only time will tell.

I’m no poet, so that’s not in my future. I may do another non-fiction project, though.

Finally, where can DyingWords followers and others find your work?

Probably the best place is my website: https://suecoletta.com. From there, readers can choose their preferred format to fit any device, read samples of all my books, and/or request autographed paperbacks.

*   *   *

Sue Coletta’s bio includes Member of Mystery Writers of America, Sisters in Crime, International Thriller Writers, and NH Writers Project, Sue Coletta is an award-winning, bestselling, multi-published crime writer. Sue’s also a proud member of the Kill Zone, an award-winning writing blog, where she posts every other Monday. In 2017, Feedspot honored her Murder Blog with the Top 50 Crime Blogs on the Net Award. She’s also the communications manager for the Serial Killer Project and Forensic Science and founder of #ACrimeChat on Twitter.

Join Sue’s Crime Lover’s Lounge and be the first to know about giveaways, contests, and have inside access to deleted scenes (when available). Your secret key code will unlock the virtual door. Or follow the blog. Either way, you’ll score two free killer reads!

Sue lives in northern New Hampshire with her husband, who deals with a crazy crime writer feeding circus peanuts to crows named Poe and Edgar (and family), her favorite squirrels, Shawnee and Monny, and a special chipmunk dubbed “Hip” for his enthusiasm and excited leaps each time he scores a peanut … “Hip, hip, hooray!” Under no circumstances can the other 11 chippies find out she plays favorites, or they may retaliate.

Get SCATHED, Sue Coletta’s newest crime thriller at Amazon