Poor foolish simpletons. In love with RJ, blinded by your fan status and unwilling to admit the truth. Wagner and Walken were in flagrante delecto, Wood walked in on them, was horrified, traumatized and left in the dinghy which was something she would neve have done, given her terror of water, unless she was out of her mind with emotion...which also explains why neither Walken nor Wagner would comment. I would think not! Many know the truth; the rest...cling to their fantasies. Fortunately more people know what really happened than those who refuse to accept anything other than their own blind opinions.

'Interested Party'

The 'Natalie walked in on RJ & Walken having sex' scenario was made up by the tabloids to sensationalize an already tragic event! Nowhere in the testimony of anyone who was present on the yacht is this mentioned! Ditto subsequent media interviews by those people! Given that a) RJ, Walken and Dennis Davern were the only people (apart from Natalie) on the yacht that night and b) none of them was the originator of this nasty little claim, I think it's pretty much safe to conclude that it's a load of garbage!

Incidentally, if you want to contribute to this group, please do not call us 'fools' - simply because we do not share your opinions! You have your opinion, but please do not rubblish other people's. Your post comes across as a 'rant' with no substance (it's a good idea to say why you believe something - as I have in the first paragraph) rather than simply saying "This is so and anyone who doesn't believe it is a fool!"

Joanne

You're quite right; I do apologize. However, I still maintain the story you dismiss as garbage is the truth, and of COURSE no one who was on the yacht would admit to it. In fact, Walken and Walker said virtually nothing about that night, and as I already stated, more people than not are aware of the truth...the real truth, not the fantasy one, and hopefully Wood's daughters will know the truth someday.

P.S. the "nasty claim" you dismiss so quickly had to have had some origin in fact, and most likely the truth did emerge, possibly from Davern, and was quickly supressed by the Hollywood damage control machine to protect Walken and Wagner...the tabloids do not create stories out of thin air; most have a germ of truth, and they do have many people on their payrolls to glean the truth from a wide variety of sources...despite the fact people never admit to reading them or agreeing with what they have to say. The number one publication in the USA is the National Enquirer, so someone's reading it.

Dennis Davern is a media hog! Over the years, he has regularly shot his mouth off to the media, conjoring up ever more elaberate stories in order to get himself in the 'spotlight' and make money! Yet, despite being happy to make all kinds of outlandish claims, he has never claimed that RJ and Walken had sex that night! Odd, given that he could have made an awful lot of money peddling such claims - and no doubt would have been more than happy to share them with the world!

Davern has never been 'gagged'! He was interviewed for the recent Suzanne Finstadt Natalie bio, and regularly 'resurfaces' every so often with a 'new' version of events!

If you want the 'truth' of the events, do not rely on the tabloids to provide it. Try instead reading police reports, autopsy reports and any official documents you can get your hands on.

Sorry, but there is nothing to back up the 'Wagner/Walken Sex' story. It's just that - a story! Made up by someone who wasn't present on the yacht that final night and could not possibly know what happened!

Joanne

Joanne how would you know? You weren't on the yacht. You probably never set foot in the US.

why all these old threads???

Joanne, look what you once said about Davern:

"Odd, given that he could have made an awful lot of money peddling such claims - and no doubt would have been more than happy to share them with the world!"

Don't you see that Davern could've exploited a lot. Even the police know he slept with Natalie in the motel room Friday night. Imagine the money he could've made by saying he and Nat had sex? Imagine him saying that he caught Walken and Wagner together? Yes, tons of money would've come his way. TONS.

But he never did that. Why? Because he stuck to truth, just as he did in Goodbye Natalie Goodbye Splendour. That's why. Makes sense, doesn't it?

interested party????.....you read too many tabloids...

lol...."tabloids do not make up things like this out of the thin air.".....yes, my friend, they do..there was the one about natalie being alive and living in mexico...they must have had plenty of evidence for that one...
as for the rj-walken on the boat thing....it's old tabloid news...it was derived from suzanne finstad's book where she wrote that natalie found rj in a sexual situation with a man in their house. tabloid people must have thought "hmmmm, that sounds good, let's print that and maybe it will catch on." and it did.
dennis davern shut his mouth because people stopped listening and paying...he discredited himself in front of a television audience...his stories constantly changed...the object was to make money..
the whole scenario does not make sense....about the rj-walken thing....but we can go over this over and over...i have not posted on the site for close to a year...i stopped by to see it anything new is being said but i found the same old......

Gabbott

Actually, I remember hearing the 'RJ and Walken having sex' rumour before Suzanne Finstadt's Natalie bio was published. I suspect it was made up by someone (most likely a tabloid journalist), then was passed around, 'growing legs' when it hit the internet. Its legs then grew 'stronger' when Suzanne Finstadt's book hit the book stores.

Basically, this story is a load of garbage. It has never been written about (other than to discount it) in any reputable article or book and even Finstadt's dodgy Natalie bio (which contains its fair share of 'unsubstantiated gossip') doesn't mention it!

The final nail in the coffin of this story must surely be that neither Wagner, Walken or Davern has ever told this story - and they are the only people who could tell us what happened that night. So if the story didn't originate with them (and let's face it, if it was true, Davern would have no hesitation in telling the world about it), then it has to be catagorized as nothing more than an 'Urban Legend' (or tabloid fiction)!

Joanne

One fact that cannot be disputed, Wagner and Walken will not talk about that night, the weaker of the three Davern was chosen to make an ass out of himself to discredit the whole situation to make everyone want to forget about it.

I half buy that natalie fell off the boat, I half buy she wanted to get off the boat for some reason, but these two instances are the only two ways I believe she got in the water.

RJ and Walken doing it that night? anything is possible if I would guesstimate I would say there was a huge fight over Natalie RJ in a drunken rage ect.

Vlad

Why should RJ and/or Walken have to keep 'rehashing' the events leading up to Natalie's death? They've given an account of those events to the relevant authorities - and RJ has no doubt discussed it with his family. RJ clearly does not feel that he should be continually (and publically) retelling the story. It must be very painful for him and would serve no useful purpose - people like you will never be satisfied with what he has to say, so why should he bother wasting his breath?

I admire the dignified way in which RJ has conducted himself since Natalie's death. He's never exploited her name, her image or his connection to her - and has never said a bad word about her.

As for Davern, he wasn't 'chosen' for anything! He realised he could make money peddling his 'story', so he has spent the last 25 years doing just that! He's a greedy and despicable person!

Joanne

Joanne,

I will be satisfied when I hear the truth, if what rj is saying is the truth so be it, but too many people doubt what he is saying and at this point majority rules.

Obviousley you love him and he walks on water.

This sums it up:

God grant us the serenity to accept the things we cannot change,(rj's lies)
courage to change the things we can,(finding out the truth)
and the wisdom to know the difference.(all the bullshit that is written)

Vlad

No, I do not think RJ 'walks on water'! He's not perfect, just an ordinary human being with faults and fallibilities - just like the rest of us!

However, I do not believe for a moment that he deliberately did anything to harm Natalie that night. I also feel that you (and those who share your opinion) will never accept anything he has to say, so why bother putting himself through the emotional turmoil of reliving the events of that night?

There will always be questions - and there is probably very little RJ can do to answer them to your (and others') satisfaction.

I think too much has been made of the 'tabloid' account of what happened. Forget that and look at the police reports/autopsy report and other 'official' documents, which were written by people with access to the yacht, Natalie's body and witnesses (RJ, Walken and Davern).

Joanne

i have a full copy of the autopsy report. there is nothing there that indicated foul play.
rj was asked if natalie was suicidal..he said no. if he was really the animal that some of you make him out to be he could have been less direct in his answer. think about that.
robert wagner is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. those who feel that he is responsible in some way will criticize him for not giving interviews and the reaction would be the same if he constantly spoke about it. people would say he wants the attention. the man can't win.
i agree with joanne, i respect and admire the way he has handled the situation. he does things that no one knows about, things that show great love and respect for his late wife. he keeps it all to himself. i don't feel that he wears wings but i do feel that he is a decent human being who suffered a great tragedy in his life. as we approach the 25th anniversary of natalie's death we should put away all of this hostility and let her rest in peace.
as far as her children are concerned, i suspect that they know all that can be told about that horrible night. they accept what they were told. if they can accept it...whatever it was...then those who constantly speculate should accept it also.
why can't this have been an accident...if it were the average person the accident theory would have been accepted but this is a celebrity so it had to be foul play. what a shame that some of you who claim to love her cannot celebrate her life and her incredible career.

You and joanne know nothing you are both starstruck why dont you both start looking outside the envelope instaed of living in a dream world, maybe you will start seeing clearly, AND what the majority see's.

first of all, i know more about natalie wood and her life than you will ever know...and where is the majority? no one posts anymore and that is probably because of the insults and hostility because of differences of opinion.

Your claim to natalie is very dubious. You know nothing of what I know about Natalie. You have tunnel vision look outside the tunnel as do the majority.

what you know about her and her life is evident in some of what you say and some of the questions that you have asked on this site...trust me, i know a great deal...i'm very confident about that. and if anyone has tunnel vision, it's you. you refuse to look beyond what you think may have happened. i have a friend who feels as you do. we are able to chat about this and not insult each other. he listens to me and i listen to him. you are totally close minded about this. it seems that your hatred of rj is more intense than any of the positive feelings that you have toward natalie. many people who have left this site probably have done so because of the insults and hostility. there is no majority here...

Vlad

If anyone needs to 'look ouside the envelope', it's you! You criticise anyone who dares to challenge your opinion and turn every discussion into a slanging match!

For the record, I base my opinions on the known facts. Not on tabloid stories, tacky bios or the rantings of a con artist who changes his story regularly in order to make yet more money from it!

Joanne

Joanne you and Mr. Abbott are right I do come off strong but its in a conversation sense, for instance when I say "you do not know what you are talking about" I mean it like like in conversation "aw common you don't know what you talking about" thats it I am very sorry and I will reply in a sensable mannor please accept my apologies.

It seems like we always do start arguing when things get to a certian point lets work on that and get along I will.

I like contaversy sorry I just do, we were all having a good talking when that guy posted about the rape kit, I thought we were getting somewhere in solving that issue but then tempers flaired and it blew up mostly because everybody thought the subject matter was vulgar, but yet people will sit and watch the sick goings on with the ramsey case go figure i guess.

I apologise, I hope you will both accept.

apology accepted...we should all be able to share our feelings without being in total agreement with each other...i am glad that the hostility is coming to an end....hopefully, we can have productive talks without animosity..maybe some of the old group members will see the change and return...

Same here. Apology accepted.

Joanne

Joanne,


Do you yahoo chat? It would really be nice to chat with someone who has alot of knowledge of Nat. Please email me at Vladislaus_666@yahoo.com maybe we can get together.

Thanks in advance,

Vlad

Vlad

Of course the first line of the serenity 'prayer' could also be interpreted thus:-

God grant us the serenity to accept the things we cannot change(Natalie's death was a tragic accident and no matter what garbage some people believe, that is what the investigation at the time concluded).

Joanne

Never heard the Wood living alone in Mexico story Given her terror of water, though, something very serious drove her into a Zodiac, alone, in the middle of the night, and Walken and Wagner "together" is the only scenario that explains it.

you are right, we do need new blood here....natalie went to retie the line because she could not sleep with the sound of the dinghy banging against the boat...when this bothered her under normal circumstances she called rj to do this chore...but under the circumstances she tried to do so herself. it was cold, there was algae on the swimstep..she was intoxicated..she slipped and fell into the water. although natalie was afraid of deep, dark water she spent a great deal of time on the water... not only with rj but with other people in her life..she loved travel by boat. even her fear would not get in the way of the pleasure that she got while on the water. i do believe, though, that she never would have left the boat alone at night under any circumstances..
there was one other fact that has never been mentioned and i hesitate to mention it out of respect for natalie. it's something that makes me certain that she was not leaving the boat...that her intention was to go to bed...if i had any doubts this fact stilled them...
i have a question for you...let's create the scenario...natalie, rj , walken and davern returned from the restaurant...they had an argument..not a long one...very brief,,she went to the stateroom...rj and the rest remained in the salon..you take it from here...what happened in your opinion...trace the final steps..in your opinion.

'Interested Party'

No, that isn't the most likely scenario. If we were going for the most likely scenario for her leaving the yacht, surely it would be that Natalie, still smarting over the argument with RJ, thinks "Sod this for a game of soliders!", then goes up on deck to board the dinghy. The 'sex' scenario to me is the least likely.

Bare in mind that Natalie was drunk. She also had motion sickness medication in her system, which shouldn't have been mixed with alcohol (possible side effects of doing this include drowsyness and dizziness). She wasn't her 'normal' self - her inhibitions and fear threshold were lowered. This must be taken into account when considering how she would have behaved that night.

There isn't a shred of evidence to back up the 'RJ and Walken having sex' story. As has been pointed out, no-one on the yacht that night has ever claimed that this happened - not even Dennis Davern. Which means it must have been made up by someone who wasn't there (and therefore could not possibly know what really happened). Presumably a tabloid 'hack'!

Joanne

Thanks for the cogent, erudite response, "Anonymous..." Thank God you're around to set the record straight, LOL!

Although I do agree somewhat with what you are saying, if she did indeed drown from falling overboard then so be, if she drown from getting into the dinghey because she wanted to get away from the boat , your theory makes sense.

Yes. I feel it is somewhat more than a theory, but for now, that term will suffice. You have excellent instincts; stick to them and don't allow the bully, Joanne, to browbeat you into thinking she is the Oracle at Delphi...because she is far from it and her entire POV is colored by her "blind fan" status and a plethora of hubris.

'Interested Party'

I am not a bully! Neither am I trying to browbeat anyone! I was responding to your comments, which you have couched from day one in an aggressive manner! Please refrain from personal attacks on people and stick to the topic of this board - discussing Natalie's death.

Incidentally, I do not claim to 'know it all'. However, I do at least base my opinions on the 'known' facts (contained in the autopsy report, police reports etc) rather than what was/is written in the tabloids. After all, the police examined the scene and talked to witnesses, while the coroner actually saw and examined Natalie's body. These people aren't infallible, but their opinions/conclusions count for more than tabloid journalist's.

Joanne

LOL: if ANYONE on this forum is aggressive, it is you, my dear. You may not see it, or admit it if you did, but I have read your responses to other people's posts and you have set yourself up as some sort of oracle, an omnisicient being, when in point of fact, you know no more than any of us. You bully poor Vlad unmercifully, and you impart what you do know with no grace or kindness or even politeness. You need to step back and re-evaluate yourself and the impression you create for new users to this forum...try a little objectivity for a change and stop being the cop who has to have the last word and cut everyone you dislike to the quick with your verbal vitriol. MOST unbecoming, don't you know, esp in a female. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, which is all any of us has...and the freedom to express said opinion in any way we deem appropriate. Don't like it? Don't read it. Simple.

'Interested Party'

You are turning this discussion into a personal attack on me. I honestly have no idea why and I refuse to be drawn into some kind of schoolyard slanging match with you.

This is a board devoted to the discussion of Natalie Wood and her death. It is not a place for personal attacks.

Joanne

Ah, but you began the attacks on me, Chap and Vald; in fact, you are the little female cop who polices the forum and reprimands any who don't follow your POV about RJ. You do not have the ability or the honesty to admit you harass others who disagree with you...but then, after reading your posts, it's understandable; those who have a fault they dislike in themselves often turn that fault around and attack others when in fact, it is they alone who are at fault. I remind you, one, anyone can say anything and have any opinion about Natalie and her demise, also RJ, wihtout fear or censure, and if someone wants to type in caps, that is their privilege and their prerogative...now please, pull your claws back in and refrain from critiquing HOW others choose to write. Disagree with what they say? Fine, but respond in a professional, restrained manner and keep a lid on your emotions and your vitriol. You have a very aggressive, unpleasant, bullying manner when you address others. Be aware of it.

Can we please get back to the subject of Natalie?

Joanne

Certainly. Please explain why Wagner waited for 2 hours to report her missing...all any of us has is opinions, so all is conjecture, but this is clearly puzzling and does not appear, prima facie, to be the mark of an innocent man, but rather, a man who has something to hide and needs to collect himself, and perhaps think up a viable story...

'INTERESTED PARTY'

There is a simple explanation why RJ waited so long to call for help (and of course, this is my opinion - not proven fact) - basically, he did not realise Natalie was in danger!

Think about it. She leaves the 'saloon' after the argument, ostensibly to go to bed (and since she was in her night clothes when found, that does seem to be what she originally intended). Unbeknownst to those left in the 'Saloon', Natalie decides to go up on deck - either to re-tie the dinghy or board it (though I subscribe to the re-tieing theory). Anyway, whatever the reason for going up on deck, while untieing the dinghy's rope, she becomes dizzy/disorientated (and/or loses her footing) and falls overboard. She grabs for the dighy, which starts to float away.

Back down below, RJ finally goes down to the bedroom to check on Natalie (which is what he's always claimed). She's not there, so he instigates a search of the yacht. She is nowhere to be found. However, the dinghy is found to be missing. The logical explanation to be drawn from this? Natalie has boarded the dinghy and gone ashore. RJ is not initially worried by this - after all, they had argued, and Natalie had been very angry when she headed for the bedroom.

As such, he initially decides there is no reason to panic. It is only when a length of time has passed that he decides to call for help.

It's easy with hindsight to say he should have called for help straight away, but he didn't have the luxury of hindsight. He called the situation as he saw it. I don't see any duplicity in this, just someone who honestly believed at the time that his wife wasn't in any immediate danger. Perhaps had the dinghy not also been missing, RJ would have called for help straight away, but I honestly think that he believed Natalie had taken the dinghy somewhere.

Joanne

FIRST OF ALL IT'S A SALON, NOT A SALOON. HE KNEW THAT SHE WAS AFRAID OF DEEP, DARK WATER AND THAT IT WAS VERY COLD AND THAT SHE COULD NOT SWIM. THAT SHOULD HAVE TRIGGERED CONCERN. HE CARED ONLY ABOUT HIMSELF, WORRIED ABOUT HIMSELF. THAT HINDSIGHT CRAP IS AN EXCUSE. YOU MAKE EXCUSES FOR HIM. HE WAITED TOO LONG TO CALL FOR HELP AND SHE DIED. HE ALLOWED IT TO HAPPEN. A HALF HOUR WOULD HAVE BEEN TO LONG. HE SHOULD HAVE SAID "NATALIE IS NOT HERE, LET'S GO LOOK FOR HER." AND I MEAN RIGHT AWAY. HE KNEW THAT SHE WOULD NEVER GO OUT ALONE AT NIGHT. AND HER KNEW THAT SHE WAS INTOXICATED. HELLO!!!! IF HE DID NOT SEE DANGER COMING TO HER THAN HE IS MORE STUPID THAN HE APPEARS.

...AND HE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE THE BALLS TO IDENTIFY THE BODY OR TO GO SEE HER BEFORE SHE WAS BURIED. HE COULDN'T TAKE IT. BOO-HOO. POOR BAY. PROBABLY COULDN'T FACE HER EVEN UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES. HER KIDS WENT BUT NOT WAGNER. AGAIN, HE THINKS OF HIMSELF. WIMP. IF THAT WERE MY WIFE I WOULD HAVE TO SAY MY GOOD-BYES IN PRIVATE INSTEAD OF PUTTING ON A SHOW IN FRONT OF HER FAMILY AND FRIENDS AT THE FUNERAL. LEST WE NOT FORGET, REPORTERS AND PHOTOGRAPHERS WERE THERE. THIS WAS A PHOTO OPP FOR THE CHARM BOY. HE GAVE THE BEST PERFORMANCE OF HIS LIFE AT THAT FUNERAL.

I really don't know why it's so hard to accept that RJ might have simply not realised Natalie was in danger. Given that the dinghy was also missing, then it would have been pretty straightforward to conclude that Natalie was 'in' the dinghy and had taken it ashore. I don't see a problem with that. It seems a pretty logical conclusion to come to based on the evidence to hand (Natalie and the dinghy missing). Unfortunately, it was the wrong conclusion - but RJ can;t be blamed for coming to that conclusion.

As for not going to see the body - there is such a thing as 'wanting to remember the loved one as they were when they were alive'. Not everyone wants to view a dead loved one's body. That doesn't make them terrible people. RJ made that choice. I see nothing wrong with that. Someone else identified the body because he couldn't face seeing his beloved wife lying dead on a slab! Understandable! We all grieve and handle death in different ways.

As for the funeral. That was not a performance. RJ's grief was 100% genuine. He did not choose to grieve in front of the media - they intruded on what should have been a private ceremony.

Incidnetally, you can't have it both ways. Either RJ was a lousy actor (in which case, faking grief would have been impossible to pull off convincingly) or he was a good actor.

Joanne

LOL....HE WAS A LOUSY ACTOR BECAUSE HE DIDN'T CONVINCE ME. YOU LEFT YOURSELF WIDE OPEN FOR THAT ONE!! AS FAR AS THE PRESS, HE KNEW THEY WOULD BE THERE. DON'T BE NAIVE. YES, RIGHT, IT WAS ON THE FRONT PAGE OF ALL THE PAPERS BUT THERE WILL BE NO PRESS AT THE FUNERAL. OK. SURE. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN'T SEE THAT HE IS RESPONSIBLE. AGAIN, IT WAS DARK, COLD, SHE COULD NOT SWIM. IT'S NOT LIKE SHE TOOK A RIDE TO THE STORE AND HAD NOT RETURNED. THEY WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE OCEAN. HE THOUGHT OF HIMSELF AND NATALIE LOST HER LIFE. SOMEONE HERE SAID THAT THERE IS NO MAJORITY. WRONG. THERE IS A MAJORITY HERE AND ELSEWHERE. I HAVE SPOKEN TO OTHERS AND SURFED THE WEB. THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE HOLD HIM RESPONSIBLE. FACE IT, HE SCREWED UP AND DEPRIVED HIS CHILDREN OF A MOTHER.

AND AS FAR AS NOT GOING TO SEE HER BEFORE SHE WAS BURIED, HE SAID IT HIMSELF, HE DID NOT THINK THAT HE WOULD COME BACK FROM IT. AGAIN, THINKING OF HIMSELF. HE OWED HER THAT. OTHERS WHO LOVED HER WENT. AND SHIT, HE SHOULD HAVE SEEN HIS KIDS THROUGH THAT, NOT RICHARD GREGSON AND MART CROWLEY. FACE IT, HE'S A WIMP.

There is nothing 'wimpish' about not wanting to see the dead body of a loved one! When my grandpa (to whom I was very close - he lived with us for the last 6 years of his life) died last year, I was given the option of going to see his body. I refused. At no time did my mother or older sister (who both viewed the body) ever make me feel like my descision was in any way 'wrong', or that I was a 'wimp' for not wanting to do that. And, to be honest, I don't regret it, because the only images/memories I have of him now are of a man who was very much alive!

At the end of the day, it's up to the individual if they want to see their loved one's body. Not everyone wants to. Some people (myself included) believe that once you die, your spirit leaves and your body is an empty 'husk'. But I would never, ever condemn anyone for wanting to see a loved one's remains, if they feel that it will be a comfort to them. That's their choice!

RJ was heart-broken by the loss of his wife! He was in mourning! There was no deliberate 'abandoning' of his daughters - they were all (as a family) grieving for their loss! There was nothing 'selfish' or 'fake' about his behaviour! Though if he'd behaved like 'Superman', you'd be complaining that he wasn't 'grief-stricken' enough!

Joanne

DON'T ASSUME WHAT MY THOUGHTS WOULD BE. HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE BY THE SIDES OF HIS KIDS. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT HE SHOULD HAVE DONE. HE IS A SELF-SERVING MAN.