Let's cut to the chase: what is your definition of "incoherent," since you seem to think anyone who is in this condition can safely operate a motorized vehicle.

Or is it just Super Hero Wagner who can?

By the way, it's okay to say you liked my Buster Keaton story. (LOL) It's one of my favorite writings I've ever done. That man was great, and the research and writing was a true pleasure!

It's one of my many test readers' favorites, too.

Dream on....

still dreaming

You missed my point completely (but why am I not surprised). I'm claiming just the opposite - someone who IS so drunk that he's incoherent CANNOT safely operate a vehicle, or Sea Doo for that matter. Which is one of the reasons I don't believe that Wagner was incoherent, sloppy, fall down drunk (as you seem to believe).

Try to follow:

1) If Wagner was as drunk as you believe, there is NO WAY he could have possibly searched for Natalie in such a drunken state using the Sea Doo. So he either a) never looked for her because he was too drunk or b) looked for her, which means he was capable of doing so, which means he wasn't incoherent, sloppy, fall down drunk.

2) While the entire party was drinking all weekend, Wagner at that point in his life was drinking pretty heavily, which means he could have consumed an awful lot and still not have been incoherent, sloppy, fall down drunk.

3) The police findings did not note him to be incoherent, sloppy, fall down drunk.

Get it now?

Before I answer your reply further, let's establish something: you believe Robert Wagner went out on his Skee-Doo that night and looked for poor Natalie, right?

And, hmmm...you were the only one out there that night to witness this, right?

No? Then who was? Why haven't they come forward in the last twenty-seven years?

Can you read??? Apparently not. Of course I don't know whether he went looking for her on the Sea Doo, as he claims. What I'm trying to establish is(follow me now) WHETHER HE WAS AS DRUNK A YOU BELIEVE HE WAS! Get it!? Sheesh.

Once again....

If Wagner was as drunk as you believe, there is NO WAY he could have possibly searched for Natalie in such a drunken state using the Sea Doo. So he either:

a) never looked for her because he was too drunk or
b) looked for her, which means he was capable of doing so, which means he wasn't incoherent, sloppy, fall down drunk.

Now to figure out if the answer is "a" or "b", one has to look at the other activities that weekend.

Yes, the entire party was drinking all weekend, but Wagner at that point in his life was drinking pretty heavily, which means he could have consumed an awful lot and still not have been incoherent, sloppy, fall down drunk. Moreover, the police findings did not note him to be incoherent, sloppy, fall down drunk.

So that leads me to believe that he wasn't as drunk as you believe he was.
And really, the Sea Doo search is irrelevant since it can't be corroborated. For me, the answer lies in two things: his heavy drinking during that point in his life as well as the police report.

But how did this even become an issue? It really means nothing.

Wagner was very drunk yes, more than Natalie, men can hold more booze and Wagner was much more of a drinker than Natalie. The sea doo was never used, it was checked. Wagner make no attempt to look for Natalie because he knew she was already dead yes. Vlad know.

Stop whining!

It's safe to say we can eliminate choice "B" from your given choices because there were no witnesses.

So, process of elimination says that he did not go and search for her on his own craft - whatever it was, and including the "Splendour." Okay, here comes my point, don't miss it:

Robert Wagner through his attorney lied in his initial statement to the press. The statement said that he searched for his wife via his (own) "small cruiser."

Why did he lie, Mr. Anonymous? His story was not verified, nor did R.J. attempt to back this statement up with proof. The fact is, nobody bothered to call him on this lie, so he didn't HAVE to prove it. The police dropped the ball, the coroner's office dropped the ball, and so did everyone else involved in the case. But, that's typical in L.A., where if you have money you can get away with everything, including murder! Maybe he didn't buy his way out of this, but laziness and neglect on the part of the investigating team members cost Natalie a fair shot at justice, if needed. Regardless of whether R.J. was responsible for her death, Natalie deserved to have her case done much better than it was, not quickly swept under the rug in a matter of days!

Now, please answer, if R.J. did not do something sinister that night to cause Natalie's drowning, why did he lie about searching for her in his own craft? Of course, his statement contained other lies, too, but let's start with this lie. Where there's smoke, there's fire, as the saying goes. This was lie #2, but we'll start with it. We can discuss R.J.'s lie #1, Natalie often taking the dinghy out alone at night, next.

Putting your snarkiness aside....after all, it wasn't me who misinterpreted your postings. But I will answer your questions (even though I find it surprising that you're "discussing" Natalie with me. Or is what you're doing considered "responding"? It's hard to keep up with your finite definitions.)

As I've stated over and over, I agree that Wagner could have involved the CG sooner in the search, but again that's no guarantee that Natalie would have been found. Nor is his searching for her in the Sea Doo really an issue. Whether he did or didn't really doesn't change the outcome. I was using the possibility of a search as a way to establish his level of intoxication. But we really aren't able to use it since we don't know if it took place or not. But the bottom line is - he DID notify the authorities (albeit, it could have been sooner); but it's not like he went to bed and hoped for the best.

As for the attorney's statement - playing devil's advocate, by all accounts Wagner wasn't really up mentally to sitting down and discussing for hours what went on. So I would not be surprised if Ziffren made his statements without even consulting Wagner, or briefly consulting him and assuming the rest of the story. If that is the case, Wagner didn't lie; Ziffren made statements that were factually incorrect. At that point in time (the day immediately after Natalie's death as well as days and weeks after), I doubt Wagner was paying much attention to what was going on in back and forth between his attorney and the press. In fact, Wagner has been quoted as saying that Ziffren asked Wagner to promise him one thing immediately after he arrived at the house - and that was don't read the papers or watch the news. So if you take your hatred for Wagner out of this, the scenario I've suggested is certainly plausible.

For the record, we're still discussing R.J.

I also considered that possibility that his attorney made up a lot of what he told the press. But, since neither the police, nor the coroner's office bothered to watch the interview, we might never know. Why hasn't someone asked that attorney by now if he was making it up, or if it was exactly how he was told by R.J.?

Is the guy still alive, by the way?

Nonetheless, it was still a bunch of lies, and it was attached to Robert Wagner's name. He is ultimately responsible for what his attorney says to the press! So, that excuse will not be accepted.

I had an e-mail today from Marti Rulli and I agree with what she stated. She said that if this tragedy would have happened today, the media would be even more all over it. They would not take Ziffren's statements at face value. They would do their own checking up on what he claimed. They would ask the police to confirm what was claimed, and if the police could not, they would ask them when they were going to do their job and ask why R.J. was not being made to prove he went out on his own in his own boat; why he lied about the major timeline difference; etc. They also would have interviewed anyone and everyone who was involved in this matter.

I agree with Marti. Wagner would not have been given "Carte Blanche" by today's media!

By the way, once the media interviewed numerous people from the restaurant, your Robert Wagner's drunkeness would have been exposed!

Here's a quote for the "Vanity Fair" article, and pretty much confirms what Suzanne Finstad wrote in her book:

"Some of the restaurant's staff thought the Wagner party was drinking rather heavily...After the group departed, Don Whiting, the restaurant's manager, warned Kurt Craig, the harbormaster, to keep an eye out for their safety."

Finstad interviewed several employees and patrons, who all to a person, stated that everyone in the Wagner party was out of it (drunk), but especially R.J.!

Any idiot can read the list/amount of the alcohol R.J. consumed that day/night and realize he was drunk. And despite Dr. Noguchi's claim that Natalie wasn't drunk, or only "slightly" drunk, her blood alcohol level was .14 percent, which was .04 past the legal limit for operating a motor vehicle under California law. Both were legally drunk/under the influence, as were Walken and Davern.

Why is it my "Robert Wagner's drunkeness"? (BTW - it's drunkenness.) He's not mine, for goodness sake. As I've stated before, I'm trying to look that this objectively; I don't have a dog in this fight. You, on the other hand, have these preconceived notions that filter what you're reading so you don't get the gist of what's being written.

Once again - I AGREE that he was drinking heavily! That's not being disputed. Everyone was drinking heavily. But what hasn't been established is how drunk Wagner was. By the things I've read, I don't think he was sloppy, fall down, incoherent drunk (as you seem to believe). If he was, how come he was capable of calling the harbor patrol and then the CG? If he was so "out of it" he wouldn't have been able to do that. Moreover, if he was heavily drunk, he would slurred his words when calling them. That wasn't noted by anyone, so it apparently wasn't the case. Again, it has been well documented that Wagner was drinking heavily during that period of his life. Couple that with the fact that he's a pretty big guy, and it's no surprise that he could hold his liquor.

Of course it was noted by someone that he slurred his speech when he made the distress call, and when he talked to them in person!

AND HE DID NOT CALL THE COAST GUARD - SOMEONE ELSE CALLED ON HIS BEHALF!

Get your facts right, then come back and we'll discuss this some more.

It was noted by "someone"? Who?

By the questions you've posted in other threads, it's apparent that I've read much more than you about that night and I've NEVER read in any legitimate source that Wagner slurred his words when he called the harbor patrol. (Maybe that's the difference; I get my facts from legitimate sources. You believe any yahoo who posts rumor and gossip on the internet.)

No, you get your facts straight. Then we can discuss what is actually KNOWN to have happened that night, not what YOU would like to have happen that night.

My name is not Vlad. I do my homework. Do you consider Suzanne Finstad a reliable source? If not, why not? She got a fat bankroll in advance from her publisher to go do the research and investigation. She interviewed countless folks. Just because I did not have the names off the top of my head doesn't mean they didn't exist. I will name names, since you missed 'em during your long hours of reading.

But, if you do not consider Finstad a reliable source than I am wasting my time with you. Let me know.

In the meantime, here is some more information. Although R.J. did try to contact the Harbor Patrol, it was to no avail, as they had closed up for the evening. Turns out R.J. didn't even notify the harbormaster himself. That was done by either Don Whiting or Paul Wintler. Doug Oudin was the harbormaster, and was awaken by one of the those men. Both Whiting and Wintler stated that Robert Wagner WAS DRUNK!!!

Don Whiting's comments, or Finstad's after being told what had been said by Whiting, describing Robert Wagner:

"...intoxicated Wagner party." (pg. 358)

"He (Whiting) recognized Wagner's voice 'SOUNDING DRUNK'..." (pg. 358)

"A HEAVILY INTOXICATED R.J. told Whiting via the ship's radio that Natalie was not on the Splendour..." (pg. 358)

"...alcohol-fueled night..." (pg. 358)

"...(R.J.) was EXTREMELY drunk. The calls were almost INCOHERENT" (pg. 358)

"Wintler described R.J. to police as 'DRUNK and a little panicky." (pg. 359)

"(R.J.) told Wintler he and Natalie 'had a fight'..." (pg. 359)

"Shortly after 2:30 a.m., by Whiting's statement, he and Wintler realized they needed guidance in their amateur search for a movie star lost at sea. They decided to awaken the local harbormaster, Doug Oudin, since R.J. did not want them to alert the Coast Guard or Baywatch." (pgs. 359-360)

"(Oudin upon arriving aboard the Splendour stated) The skipper and R.J. WERE SO INTOXICATED THEY COULD BARELY STAND UP OR FORM A SENTENCE..." (pg. 359)

"R.J. didn't say anything about 'the fight' he had with Natalie, which he mentioned (earlier) to Wintler." (pg. 359)

"R.J. told Oudin it was 'completely out of character' for Natalie to take the dinghy out at night alone. 'He said she wouldn't have.' R.J. also told Oudin that Natalie was afraid of the water." (pg. 359)

"Oudin finally made the call to the Coast Guard at 3:30 a.m." (pg. 361)

He also told the Sheriff's dept. a complete opposite story he had earlier told Wintler - that Natalie probably took the dinghy out all alone in the dark water to the bar. He had said to Wintler that there would have been no reason to do that, nor was she accustomed to doing that (taking the dinghy out alone at night).

BOTTOM LINE: ROBERT WAGNER WAS DRUNK BEFORE AND DURING THE SEARCH FOR NATALIE! WHAT IS ALSO TRUE IS THAT HE LIED, AND/OR CONTRADICTED HIMSELF DURING QUESTIONING BY MORE THAN ONE PERSON. FURTHERMORE, HE HID DETAILS FROM THOSE CALLED UPON TO SEARCH FOR NATALIE, AND LATER FROM THOSE WHO WOULD INVESTIGATE HER DROWNING!

This is not a good apple we're taling about, folks. We're talking about a man who cannot escape the guilt he rightly holds.


*All quotes taken from "Natasha: The Biography of Natalie Wood" by Suzanne Finstad. Copyright 2001 by Suzanne Finstad.

i think wagner would prefer to be characterized as incoherently drunk. That way people might question his ability to concoct a story that the police would not question. his defenders have said that he was too drunk to reason clearly so how could he have lied so well. something else to think about.

So your only source is Finstadt?? Then we are wasting each others time because I DO NOT consider Finstadt to be a legitimate source due to the fact that she clearly had an agenda and presented all of her "facts" in a way to support that agenda. End of story. Her book is not an "unbiased" look at the events of that night. (Nor was Lambert's, so don't give me that "you're just defending Wagner" crap. I'm neither defending nor incriminating him. And Maryanne is right - if my goal was to defend Wagner, I'd use the "he was too drunk" defense and be done with it.) What I am trying to do is look at the events fairly and impartially, without the biased lens used by Finstadt. Sadly you, Reverend Michael, appear to be using Finstadt's same lens.

FINSTAD, SCHMINDSTAD!

Her interviewees had no reason to lie! (Lana Wood, the exception, maybe.)

p.s. No, Finstad isn't my only source.

She's the only one you cite. shrug

I "CITE" HER INTERVIEWEES, YOU _______ _______!

Oh, there's a big difference.

Ask yourself this, Mr. "I Wanna Be Just Like Suzanne": Do you believe that Finstadt published the ENTIRE interview she conducted with her interviewees or just selected portions that supported her version? Yeah, I thought so.

WHETHER SHE PUBLISHED ONE WORD OR ONE HUNDRED WORDS OF HER INTERVIEWEES, THEY WERE STILL NOT HER WORDS!!!

THEY WERE HER INTERVIEWEES' WORDS!!!

"EARTH, TO MR. MORON: ARE YOU GETTING THIS?"

Re-read in my quote in an above posting how Don Whiting describes R.J. upon boarding his yacht! Does it sound like Whiting is saying R.J. held his liquor and functioned almost normally?

Dumb ___!!!

You're hopeless!

"Finstad is biased, everyone interviewed is lying!" "Boo-Hoo-Hoo!"

Oh, everyone that doesn't say what you wanna hear is lying; sorry, I'll correct that.

I stand corrected, it was Doug Oudin, the Santa Catalina Island Harbor Master, who had zero reason to lie, who made the following statement:

"The skipper and R.J. WERE SO INTOXICATED THEY COULD BARELY STAND UP OR FORM A SENTENCE..." (pg. 359)

But, just becasuse Suzanne Finstad revealed this documented statement to us, it must be a lie, according to Mr. Anonymous.

Yeah, kill the messenger.

You really need to get a grip. Aren't you capable of having a civil debate without losing control? Apparently not. Try counting to 10 and then move on with your life. The fact that a total stranger doesn't agree with you about something isn't the end of the world. Believe me, I'm not losing any sleep over the fact that you don't agree with me. Don't take it personally. Move on.

Well, answer the ******* question then! What about Doug Oudin's statement that claims both Davern and R.J. were so drunk they could hardly stand up?

You keep dodging my quotes I found to rebutt your nonsense!

Oh, because Suzanne Finstad quoted Oudin, it must be a lie, right?

Would it make any difference if Barbara Walters had quoted him?

Answer the (bleeping) question about Oudin's statement, and stop avoiding it!

They had no reason to lie? Do you believe that Davern had no reason to lie? Yet he did anyway, on NUMEROUS occasions.

She didn't interview Davern, you clueless _____!

Jeez, calm down. I never said she interviewed Davern. But she used his theory via Lana.

Lana doesn't know if Dennis lied. Marti Rulli may have something to say about Lana's own telling of the truth. You'll have to ask her, though, as she comes apart if I quote her.

(LOL)

Pass. Believe me, I have better things to do with my time than solicit the ramblings of someone who associates herself with a liar who is out to make a buck off of a tragedy. Sound familiar??

Homework? LOL Vlad created the homework CSL. Michael did you read the Vanity Fair Article? RJ's confession is in that article....read carefully.

Vanity Fair...boy, there's another reliable one. It's almost word for word Davern's version. But don't let the fact that his stories have been discredited numerous times stop you from believing what you want to believe.

I like Vlad. Lissen to Vlad.

Ricky V
(no login) Re: May I Have Your Definition Of "Incoherent," Mr. Anonymous?
No score for this post September 24 2011, 6:23 PM


I like Vlad. Lissen to Vlad.

ziffren is dead.

ziffren's wife, mickey, was interviewed extensively for natalie biographies. i believe she is living in California.

i just checked....she died in 2004.

Paul Ziffren died 10 years after Natalie.

So you're in favor of "trial by media"? Frankly the actions of today's media make me sick.

I'm in favor of personal interviews and that's exactly what Suzanne Finstad did.

Incoherent? wasted, blurred vision, disheveled clothing, red eyes, booze morning breath, unbrushed teeth, not been to bed all night, hair uncombed

Sound like anyone?

Sounds like Dennis Davern!

Dennis is slim and clear-eyed. I'm thinking more of a bloated, has-been who has taken his former good looks and thrown them away in a bottle. Or is it guilt that is making him look like hell?

The inmate has taken over the asylum.