Thanks for pointing this out, about the magazine article--I remember when you posted it and I need to read it again--I remember the part about how in love they were. It's all really puzzling. :waitasec: NW was so beautiful and attractive, I can see how RW would have not wanted to see her being too friendly with other men.
CA - Natalie Wood, 43, drowned off California coast, 29 Nov 1981
- Thread starter arielilane
- Start date
New Posts
-
-
AL -- Tuskegee Uni homecoming shooting, at least one dead, multiple shot. 10 Nov 2024- Latest: glamourkitty1922
Thanks for pointing this out, about the magazine article--I remember when you posted it and I need to read it again--I remember the part about how in love they were. It's all really puzzling. :waitasec: NW was so beautiful and attractive, I can see how RW would have not wanted to see her being too friendly with other men.
vs.
Thanks for the links to the pictures...they really do illustrate my point.
Interesting points made by you, as well.
The book GNGS said that when RW and DD went into the restaurant they could see NW and CW having an easy, engaging conversation at the bar. I think this might have rankled RW's ego. He may have wanted to get rid of DD and CW so he could be alone with Natalie, but as I understood it from the book, DD was the appointed messenger and CW volunteered to go with him because he felt uncomfortable (and maybe wanted to relax with a joint, which he and DD did when they got to the boat). But who really knows? !!
RW may have been throwing a fit about the wine, like a little kid, because he was p*ssed off seeing NW talking so easily to CW and he just had to have his special wine. But this brings me back to what you said, maybe his underlying motive was to have NW to himself for awhile in the restaurant.
I agree. As far as all the events that night: what the heck was going on ???
When this happened, in 1981, I remember wondering what could RW and CW have been doing that would have prevented them from hearing NW's cries for help and responding--I mean, her cries were heard by people on another boat, so ??? Same for DD--as far as in the original "story", why didn't he rush down to the room where they supposedly were, and alert them? I don't remember hearing anything about him in the news releases. Possibly I just missed something.
Chewy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 2,343
Prescription pain killers are very often abused by drug users. If she was a careful drug user who was using them legitimately she wouldn't have been drinking while she was taking them. No?
Her liver not being in bad shape is an actual fact that is worth examining. That would indicate that she is not abusing alcohol. So I agree with you there.
Other comments
Also I don't see how someone wanting to buy a bottle of wine that he liked to take back to the boat makes him a control freak. * Rich people often ask restaurants to cater to them.
None of the other speculations into a persons character or motives really mean anything unless you have other information to back it up.
I don't see how Robert Wagner is somehow a bad man because he got angry for another man for hitting on his wife. If he was such a control freak I doubt very much he'd let NW and CW go off alone together or let DD sleep in the same hotel room as her alone without him there.
Once again the evidence doesn't match the accusations.
bolded by me.
It takes a child to just "tell it like it is" sometimes!
It was the studio's fault that Judy started in with the pills. They had her on diet pills which hyped her up, then gave her sleeping pills so she could sleep. All this when she was working on Wizard of Oz. I think Natalie was a much stronger person than Judy, but for Judy, being chemically influenced so early on really put her at a disadvantage. It's sad.
Yet you make accusations about Natalie being a drug addict with no evidence and continue to accuse Davern of maybe even killing Natalie with no evidence. I don't understand your irrational dislike of Davern. Did DD make mistakes? Yes, so did Wagner. Even if DD is a lifelong alcoholic it DOES NOT MAKE HIM A LIAR OR BAD PERSON.
I believe Davern feels guilt about what happened that night and is trying to make peace with himself.
What it an accident or something more sinister? I don't know. What is known is that help was not called for and not even an attempt to look for her by DD or RW was conducted. There is no excuse for not looking for NW. They knew she was afraid of water, couldn't swim, wasn't dressed to go on shore, had been drinking, and according to reports did not know how to use the dingy. Would Natalie been able to find her way back to shore from where they had anchored in the dark? I don't know much about the dingy. What kind of lighting was on it that NW could have used to get back to shore? I didn't see anything on the pictures of the dingy. Was a flashlight found anywhere? RW didn't think of any of this when he thought she went ashore? RW gets a pass for thinking she went ashore, but DD is wrong for the same thing. :waitasec:
I know the coroner thinks she was fixing the dingy, but I was just looking at the other theory given by RW that night.
BTW, This is my first post and I wanted to say hello to everyone. :seeya:
redheadedgal
Former Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 4,659
- Reaction score
- 105
1) no one bought a bottle of wine to take back to the boat... RW was dining at the restaurant and demanded DD go back to the boat and get a bottle of wine that he wanted b/c nothing else was acceptable. this is not normal behavior for me. who goes out to dinner and returns home/has someone go home to retrieve alcohol b/c nothing in the wine selection is acceptable? if you don't want to try new things, eat at home!
2) yet someone posted about:
-NW having a drinking problem with no supporting evidence
-NW having a drug problem with no supporting evidence
-CW hitting on NW with no supporting evidence
-NW acting "sl*tty" with with other men with no supporting evidence
-DD hitting on NW with no supporting evidence
so it's okay for some to speculate without evidence but others can't?
3) more alcohol = more lack of judgment/self control?
4) DD and NW were very close friends as has been mentioned several times now with supporting evidence ... NOT the same thing as with CW at all.
Excellent post. :clap::clap::clap:
redheadedgal
Former Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 4,659
- Reaction score
- 105
she had .07 mg of propoxyphrene (darvon) in her system. so she took a pill for pain then later had some wine. not a big deal imo. many have done it. none are drug users or abusers imo.
Chewy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 2,343
People who take drugs are drug users. I'm not sure what your point is.
DD also admits to giving Quaaludes to NW and RW. Again I'm not sure what your point is.
IMO people who use drugs are....drug users.
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusiv...bert-wagner-quaaludes-splendour-dennis-davern
Also I've seen reports that state that the autopsy report doesn't indicate the levels of drugs in her system so I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers from. But her blood alcohol level was way over the safe limit.
I'm pretty sure taking quaaludes is not only illegal but very dangerous to mix with alcohol. I would not call that "no big deal." She didn't have "some wine" her blood alcohol level proves that.
DD also admits to giving Quaaludes to NW and RW. Again I'm not sure what your point is.
IMO people who use drugs are....drug users.
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusiv...bert-wagner-quaaludes-splendour-dennis-davern
Also I've seen reports that state that the autopsy report doesn't indicate the levels of drugs in her system so I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers from. But her blood alcohol level was way over the safe limit.
I'm pretty sure taking quaaludes is not only illegal but very dangerous to mix with alcohol. I would not call that "no big deal." She didn't have "some wine" her blood alcohol level proves that.
Chewy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 2,343
Right unless it's anyone whose story you want to discount. You can't apply a form of logic to one thing and not to another just because you don't like where it's going.
Also were you there? Do you have testimony that RW "demanded" that DD go back to the boat? For all we knew he asked him to and DD didn't mind. Maybe he wanted to smoke a joint or whatever, but where is the DEMANDED part coming into it?
<modsnip> She 100 percent used and abused drugs and alcohol, but this was the 70s and many people did as well.
Her having a problem has absolutely nothing to do with what happened that night.
What I'm pointing out which seems to upset people for some reason, is the way in which the evidence does not corroborate much of DD's testimony about what happened that night.
He admits to taking quaaludes that night and admits to being bombed out of his mind. From his own mouth, his own testimony.
So I don't think he is a credible witness.
I'm also not willing to paint RW as this nafarious evil guy because he ALSO was bombed out of his mind. I think he got annoyed with CW trying to pick up his wife and also the way CW was encouraging NW to get back into the Hollywood scene again.
I think she and RW fought a lot over both of their infidelities and that when RW saw her AND THE DINGY missing (not just her) he wrongly assumed she had gone to shore and was mad and embarrassed.
All this other speculation has been completely sensationalized, only looking at certain bits of evidence and ignoring what doesn't match up to the evil RW theory. It doesn't matter if CW actually hit on NW, that is how RW perceived it. If the guy was such a control freak why in the world would he invite his wife's co-star to come along on the boat with them? Why would he allow his wife and DD to spend the night together in a hotel room if he was this hyper jealous person. He thought CW was hitting on his wife and wrote it in his book. CW has never come out and said that he felt RW was wrong to have made that statement. A jealous controlling lover doesn't allow his wife to sleep in a hotel room with another man and invite the guy to come along on a yacht trip. Your assertion makes absolutely no sense IMO.
Do I think RW was this great guy? No but being a jerk doesn't make you a murderer.
And finally I believe in personal responsibility. NW chose to use drugs and alcohol. And even if RW had told DD not to contact the coast guard, there are many many many other things that DD could have done that night to figure out what happened to NW.
He chose instead to get drunk.
BBM
1) You started the talk of Natalie being a drug abuser. Again, where is the proof? Just because it was the norm doesn't mean that she did it. There is NO proof of NW being a drug abuser or having an alcohol problem. Natalie Wood is the victim, accidental or not, and should not be trashed on here. :twocents:
2) Everyone was drinking that night. It doesn't mean NW deserves what happened. DD was probably very drunk and what does RW do-give him more alcohol. Why give the Captain, who more than anyone on that boat could have helped Natalie, more alcohol? Wouldn't you want to sober him up to look for your wife? There's enough blame to go around for DD and RW. BOTH FAILED NATALIE THAT NIGHT. The difference is DD is trying to admit his part now. Better late than never.
IMO DD is telling the truth about RW getting them together and coming up with a story to tell the police. Why? All 3 of them lied about the bottle being broken. The police said RW said it was accidently broken but later in his autobiography admitted that he broke it in a fit of rage. Why didn't CW and DD tell the truth about it then? Why did their stories match about the bottle? It couldn't have unless they discussed it beforehand BECAUSE it was a lie.
If they lied about that, what else? I'm not saying she was murdered, but they have brought the speculation on themselves by not telling the truth from the beginning. A shame they seemed more worried about themselves than worrying about Natalie.:furious:
JMO
eve
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2004
- Messages
- 3,212
- Reaction score
- 12
Excellent post, and welcome to WS. Agree with all you said. And NO one should have been more worried than RW, who was supposed to love her and was her husband! From that standpoint, I still say the buck stops with him, not a hired captain or guest on the boat.
Also I want to point out that pain meds and insomnia meds NW had are not necessarily taken every day but can be taken as needed and we cannot say NW was abusing any of her prescriptions or mixing them in a dangerous way with booze. We do NOT know that.
I agree with reheadedgal, the amount of Darvon not a big deal, even with the drinks, in my experience.
Eve
Chewy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 2,343
Eight prescription drugs and using quaaludes and other recreational drugs are proof that someone is a drug user. I am not the one who has continually tried to make an issue of it. I have no idea why it is continually being debated. IMO it has absolutely nothing to do with what happened that night except for NW maybe having compromised judgment. Even if she never had used drugs or alcohol in her life prior to this night, she did that night and it certainly must have compromised her judgement.
IMO the reason people keep throwing this back at me is because they can't debate the fact that DD's testimony is not corroborated by other testimony and evidence from that evening. So people are creating a strawman.
Where did I ever say NW deserved what happened to her that night? What kind of sick person would even suggest such a thing?
DD is not trying to admit his part that night, he is pointing the finger of blame at RW.
People keep justifying DD's behavior that night by blaming it on RW. Ex. RW was a tyrant and DD just obeyed him. RW forced DD to drink alcohol. People keep ignoring the fact that ALL PERSONS ON THAT BOAT testify that they were using drugs and drunk. THIS INCLUDES RW if you are going to give DD a pass for being drunk, why do you hold RW accountable? Double standard.
DD was in the Navy. He was a professional captain, this is what he did for a living and what he continues to do to this day.
He gave drugs to his passengers and knew full well his passengers were "trashed." One of his passengers goes missing and he sits around all night getting drunk instead of following legal protocol.
And since this is a nice juicy Hollywood gossip story people sit around discussing how RW is a control freak, he ignored his wife's cries for help, he beat her up and threw her over the side of the boat, he didn't do anything to help her because he wanted her to die or to terrorize her.
RW has a good reputation now, he's been married for over two decades to the same woman, he's raised his adoptive daughter (oh he's been accused of brainwashing her as well)
CW corroborates RW's version of the story, not DD.
DD admits to being drunk and on drugs. He published a sensationalized book accusing RW two years ago and nothing came of it.
We shall see. But all this speculating about a man's reputation is not right. There is no evidence that supports DD's version of the story.
The only thing RW didn't do, is realize right away that his wife was in trouble. He was drunk and on drugs and his judgment may have been compromised.
That is all we know at the moment. I am not going to judge a person on gossip, especially when half that gossip is not corroborated, especially when the person spreading that gossip is a known drunk and liar. And who has continually tried to "sell" his version of the story to the press for the last two years, even publishing a book and trying to make money off the death of NW.
IMO the reason people keep throwing this back at me is because they can't debate the fact that DD's testimony is not corroborated by other testimony and evidence from that evening. So people are creating a strawman.
Where did I ever say NW deserved what happened to her that night? What kind of sick person would even suggest such a thing?
DD is not trying to admit his part that night, he is pointing the finger of blame at RW.
People keep justifying DD's behavior that night by blaming it on RW. Ex. RW was a tyrant and DD just obeyed him. RW forced DD to drink alcohol. People keep ignoring the fact that ALL PERSONS ON THAT BOAT testify that they were using drugs and drunk. THIS INCLUDES RW if you are going to give DD a pass for being drunk, why do you hold RW accountable? Double standard.
DD was in the Navy. He was a professional captain, this is what he did for a living and what he continues to do to this day.
He gave drugs to his passengers and knew full well his passengers were "trashed." One of his passengers goes missing and he sits around all night getting drunk instead of following legal protocol.
And since this is a nice juicy Hollywood gossip story people sit around discussing how RW is a control freak, he ignored his wife's cries for help, he beat her up and threw her over the side of the boat, he didn't do anything to help her because he wanted her to die or to terrorize her.
RW has a good reputation now, he's been married for over two decades to the same woman, he's raised his adoptive daughter (oh he's been accused of brainwashing her as well)
CW corroborates RW's version of the story, not DD.
DD admits to being drunk and on drugs. He published a sensationalized book accusing RW two years ago and nothing came of it.
We shall see. But all this speculating about a man's reputation is not right. There is no evidence that supports DD's version of the story.
The only thing RW didn't do, is realize right away that his wife was in trouble. He was drunk and on drugs and his judgment may have been compromised.
That is all we know at the moment. I am not going to judge a person on gossip, especially when half that gossip is not corroborated, especially when the person spreading that gossip is a known drunk and liar. And who has continually tried to "sell" his version of the story to the press for the last two years, even publishing a book and trying to make money off the death of NW.
eve
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2004
- Messages
- 3,212
- Reaction score
- 12
I guess everyone is a drug user at some time then, Chewy. I still say we have no idea whether she was a drug ABUSER. Even if she took a quaalude the previous day (isn't that when the quaaludes were allegedly taken? Or was it earlier on Sat.) because of the tension, as DD said. And I do think you have made an issue out of it. I suppose most of us discussing here have, to some degree or another.
If DD (if that's who you accuse of spreading "gossip") is a drunk and a liar then I believe RW is as well. He also sold his story in a book, as a matter of fact, and changed his version of the events that night. Of course it may be all that he didn't say (in person and in his book) that speaks volumes.
Why didn't DD sell his story many years before when the story was hotter? Of course I am sure there was a time when he would not have dreamed of doing so, after all, he was being given a place to live with RW and being placed in small roles on Hart to Hart as well. Why did RW do that, do you think, Chewy? But shoot, after RW tired of him why didn't he come out with the story to make money and get back at RW for "dumping" him? That was a long long time ago, was it not?
Or did he just finally feel unable to live with what he knew as he aged?
I do hold RW more accountable than DD. DD was a hired hand. I'd bet almost anything that RW ran the show on that boat. He DID order DD around and DD submitted to it and went along with it, which is his bad, and he says as much.
I have said this before but RW was her husband. C'mon, who is more accountable?
Just curious, where do you think RW was when NW went over?
Eve
eve
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2004
- Messages
- 3,212
- Reaction score
- 12
bbm
On the contrary, Chewy there is "evidence" that a prosecutor could see as supporting DD's story, which may or may not be true. Probably as much evidence as they had before when they determined accidental death. Much of it is direct testimony from people who were there (who often tell different versions in situations like this). The only way to analyze it is to look at direct and circumstantial evidence and perhaps additional surfacing direct testimony and sort it out. No one of those 3 - DD, RW or CW have the market cornered on credibility.
I find it interesting that you think people are justifying the captain's actions. You do know it is only because he stepped up and admitted them that we even know of his actions, right?
Eve
Chewy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 2,343
IMO the only reason the case was reopened was because the other boat stated that they called for help twice and no one showed up.
If anyone on this thread can show any statement from the DAs office that states they opened the cased specifically because of what DD said, then I'd like to see it.
And actually NO it isn't because he stepped up. That's what I find daunting in all of the replies.
The captain did not follow protocol that night and do his duty as the captain of the vessel. Everyone just keeps ignoring this and pretending that he was some hippy hanging out on the boat who happened to know how to drive a boat.
This is not true. He didn't call immediately when NW was deemed missing with the dingy. It was his legal responsibility to do so. AND IT WAS EVIDENT THAT NIGHT THAT HE SCREWED UP.
That has always been obvious to anyone who knows anything about boating.
That's just not "gossipy" enough to sell rag mags so people act like it doesn't matter and totally ignore it.
But that's always been evident. And probably why DD has been spinning this tale for so long. Because by blaming it on RW and making it some creepy quasi murder, it throws suspicion elsewhere.
If you think about his main point in everything he's saying, he's basically blaming RW for the reason why he didn't immediately contact harbor patrol and follow protocol.
Hardly an act of honesty and more a CYA move IMO.
eve
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2004
- Messages
- 3,212
- Reaction score
- 12
This rigid protocol may exist in the Navy but my experience, on spendy recreational boats, the owner reigns. In this civilian holiday weekend, a woman died. Honestly, DD would have been worried about much more than his captain duties. If RW had called him out for being a negligent or criminal captain at the time, his actions may have been the focus. But this is not the case. Why? CYA appears to apply to all 3 on board. There is no reason RW would have protected DD if he had been the culprit you seem to think he was.
So we just get down to the honesty, ethics and motives of a few men in a big fat mess. One pays the other one, who is a lush, and provides his livelihood. One is a guest, for whom ignorance and detachment are bliss. One is a husband who displayed rage that evening.
Eve
Here is an interesting piece about RW. It is related to his book, could even be his own site, looks to be put out by him/his people, essentially, if I am not mistaken. But he is very likeable and sympathetic here.
http://robertwagner.blogspot.com/2008/09/life-and-loves-of-robert-rj-wagner.html
Chewy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 2,343
It's not "NAVY" protocol, it's basic protocol. If everything is fine on the boat that's one thing, but as someone else has pointed out earlier, the buddy system is generally used on boats and NW was missing with the dingy. The owner reigns as long as everything is pretty much normal. But a missing passenger is not normal. DD had an ethical responsibility NOT to be drunk that night in the first place.
It's ok, people are going to continually excuse DD's behavior even though it was horribly irresponsible and wrong.
That is because it's not as interesting to blame a captain for not following protocol as it is to twist it into some salacious bit of gossip about a faded Hollywood actor.
All four on board are responsible for what happened that night in some way.
However the giddy gossip fest has extended well beyond the reality of what happened that night and into personal gossip about people's lives.
All of them were wrong.
Legally DD is the most liable. Ethically RW might be more so, but only if he didn't think she had left the boat to go to shore. I don't see any evidence that supports this.
It's ok, people are going to continually excuse DD's behavior even though it was horribly irresponsible and wrong.
That is because it's not as interesting to blame a captain for not following protocol as it is to twist it into some salacious bit of gossip about a faded Hollywood actor.
All four on board are responsible for what happened that night in some way.
However the giddy gossip fest has extended well beyond the reality of what happened that night and into personal gossip about people's lives.
All of them were wrong.
Legally DD is the most liable. Ethically RW might be more so, but only if he didn't think she had left the boat to go to shore. I don't see any evidence that supports this.