Welcome To My Book Blog

A place to update and discuss facts surrounding the controversial, tragic death of legendary Hollywood film actress, wife and mother, Natalie Wood who drowned mysteriously Nov. 29, 1981 off Catalina Island. Thank you for visiting.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Vote: Do you think the Natalie Wood case should officially be reviewed?

Is it time to review the Natalie Wood case? You decide. Your opinion matters. Please vote before Oct. 9, 2009 (to the left) and/or leave any comment you'd like here.


  1. GBNGS I hear it LOUD&CLEAR! Natalie's death and the&events leading up 2 As well as afterwards deserve a fine toothed comb raked thru every fact and detail. The intuitive truth has lurked on the surface within millions of Hearts 4 2 long. Thank you 4 GBNGS & your loyalty and dedication with seeking Justice&giving a Voice 2 A True Hollywood Legend~ Mack/Charlotte NC

  2. It's TIME Natalie Wood had a VOICE!It's TIME Natalie Wood had a VOICE! Now with GBNGS I hear it LOUD&CLEAR! Natalie's death and the&events leading up 2 As well as afterwards deserve a fine toothed comb raked thru every fact and detail. The intuitive truth has lurked on the surface within millions of Hearts 4 2 long. Thank you 4 GBNGS & your loyalty and dedication with seeking Justice&giving a Voice 2 A True Hollywood Legend

  3. Why should the case be re-opened? The only reason for a case to be re-opened is if new evidence turns up. As far as I can see, no new evidence has been uncovered - just yet another wild story from Dennis Davern, who would be laughed out of any court-room due to a) being intoxicated on the night in question and b) having peddled a series of stories over the years (which rather goes against his claim of being silenced!).

    If Dennis Davern gave a damn about Natalie, he'd have told the truth from the outset. Instead, he's peddled lie after lie, and when he finally decides to tell the 'truth', he claims he couldn't reveal it before, because he was 'silenced'! To me, beeing 'silenced' means never talking about what happened, not coming out with a 'new, improved version' every couple of years!

    Let Natalie rest in peace. Her death was a tragic accident, and no amount of manipulating the truth will alter that fact or bring her back.

  4. Marti, might I recommend enabling comment moderation and establishing a set of rules/guidelines for comments? Debate and different points of view are one thing, but unfounded accusations are another. There is no basis to the idea that Davern has lied nor that you have manipulated any truth. I do not believe it's right for comments like the above, which show you no respect, to appear here. I feel that, after all the hard work and integrity you put into GNGS, someone who clearly hasn't even read the book should not be free to misrepresent it here.
    And I voted yes, as I believe justice is what would allow Natalie to rest in peace.

  5. johartuk, anyone can comment here, but if you haven't read GNGS, you should. I'll treat your comment as your honest opinion, and will answer with honesty. I realize GNGS is a “hard” account to hear, especially for many longtime fans of the celebrities involved. But, fact remains, it is a true account.
    You ask why the case be re-opened? The majority public believes it has always been shortchanged in facts of the Wood case. Three surviving members of that fateful cruise were not forthcoming with the authorities, or with the public. It was difficult to comprehend how Natalie ended up floating in her pajamas, socks, and coat in the ocean she feared her entire life, with bruises all over her body. The coroner’s theory is explored and shown to be impossible in GNGS, not to mention the lead detective, Rasure, told me the coroner fabricated information to fit his theory.

    New information about Natalie’s death has surfaced through the years. The coroner's theory aside, we also have new information, per Natalie’s widower who told the police the wine bottle in the main salon was broken by rough seas. In his autobiography, published 27 years later, he admits he broke the bottle in anger. He did not cooperate with the authorities. Many people see this as a real good reason to reopen a case that had been closed upon the statements of the cruise survivors that it had been “a pleasant weekend.” Yes, there is plenty of new evidence. The new information from Wagner himself is certainly not “another wild story from Dennis Davern.”

    What would happen in a courtroom, and reactions from such an event, can only be judged if it were to occur. We have simply opened the floor for discussion about this case. Dennis was a participant in one of the most talked about Hollywood tragedies of all time. He has every right to tell his account.

    The evidence testing I performed was only to reveal what amateur testing could prove in relation to the misinformation released. Yes, everyone on that fateful cruise was intoxicated. But Dennis never changed his account in his previous interviews. In fact, it is Walken whose story changed (Playboy article 1997). And it was Wagner who changed his story (autobiography 2008 presents quite a different story than what he told the authorities at the scene).
    I was involved with Dennis through virtually every interview he previously gave and some interviews may have concluded short of what’s in GNGS, but no information Dennis offered has changed. (I have the interviews, in print, audio and video to prove it).
    As for Dennis being “silenced” it is fact that Dennis was told to never reveal what he knew about that night. Attorney’s wrote the history on Natalie Wood’s death. Dennis was also asked to live at Wagner’s home after Natalie’s death, at which time his every action was monitored, and he felt threatened for an even longer period of time. Wagner provided therapy for Dennis. He also got Dennis a general-acting job on Hart to Hart which expanded to Dennis working in other TV and movies, but the new job wasn't enough to keep him from needing to release his secrets.
    He reached out to me, not to the media. In the mid-80’s he gave his first authorized interview. Many things you’ve read about Dennis’s account may not have been authorized by him. That is all the more reason for GNGS.

  6. I have always believed Dennis, but to assist in helping readers to appreciate the validity of Dennis’s experiences, we also hired a professional, extremely experienced polygraphist, and Dennis passed all of the questions posed to him as being truthful.

    Should Dennis have handled himself differently? It was his memory of Natalie and his dedication to her that ultimately won his inner battle. I did not judge Dennis because I hadn’t been through his experience, which was a traumatic one. But I have no doubt that Dennis cared about Natalie, and I also have no doubt that Dennis cared about Robert Wagner. He cared deeply. He also cares about truth.
    GNGS Amazon reviews are also experiencing "comment debates" about Dennis's account. Here’s a response comment from a reviewer (LoraC) that is posted at the reviews. I appreciate this comment, of course, but it also explains where the attention to this case should focus… this explains why some people believe the case should be reviewed.
    (comment posted at Amazon.com reviews):

    LoraC says:
    I sincerely would like to hear plausible explanations for Wagner's behavior and for the discrepancies between what he said then and what he says now. I'd like to hear a plausible explanation for the more than 25 fresh bruises on Natalie's body--and for why they were ignored by the police. I'd like someone to explain why the coroner, Thomas Noguchi, was made to retract his original statement that a fight had taken place: HE HAD THE EVIDENCE RIGHT THERE ON NATALIE'S ARMS, LEGS, AND FACE!!

    Addressing these and the many other issues raised by the book would be far more effective and convincing than attacking Davern and Rulli.

  7. I agree with christine-e, moderate the comments. People who post here should show respect for Marti and Dennis.
    Negative comments from Wagner fans are not welcome here, IMO, especially by people who could care less if Natalie rests in peace. How phony can one be.

  8. I think it's important to allow the detractors to post their thoughts. Primarily because they represent a real segment of the public, however mis-informed they may be. This book is an eye opener and anyone with the ability for critical thought can see for themselves that there was something glaringly wrong with how this case was initially investigated, anyone who can't at least admit that is basking in delusion and denial just as Wagner has for all these years. I continue to believe that this book has the power to topple this mans empire. An empire built on deceit and supported by an ever weakening foudation of privilege. May God take particilular mercy Wagner's soul, barring that, Satan will most assuredly find a kindred spirit

  9. As I just came here to delete "Jo's" comment upon the advice of good people, and because of something I recently learned, I've decided to let it stay at my blog. The difference between her view and my view needn't come down to censorship...BOTH ways!
    Her view is based on opinion whereas my view is based on fact. She has done no studied research of this subject. I have. Her fear of having to possibly encounter truth seems to ooze through her frantic comment. I almost feel sorry for her. But, I don't because I've just learned that she is part of a small group of Wagner fans who maintain a private chat at Yahoo. I have no access to the group because it is blocked to outside visitors, but someone who once belonged emailed me some fact-based information.
    This private group has set out to sabotage GNGS, even though most members have not read it, so their opinions are based on nothing more than adoration for a celebrity and their shortsighted, non-researched idle chatter. They have infiltrated my book selling site at Amazon with their members and now at my blog, several whom have not read GNGS. To review an unread book shows sheer desperation. To blast its facts even more so. I'm confident that GNGS will prevail over their small-minded antics. GNGS is based on nothing but factual, documented, certified, and truthful accounts and information. I pride myself on the pains I took to ensure it would be nothing short of truth. It's available for those who appreciate that.

  10. I agree Marti Rulli. The best way to expose a fool is to allow daylight to fall on them. To continue to allow their exiguous voices to be heard is to watch their credibility crumble.

  11. but gets me is that the poster who is bashing Marti and Dennis has not read the book. She is so besotted by Wagner that anything negative cannot possibly be true. A negative comment from a person who actually read the book and went into it with an open mind is different from someone who has not read the book and has already made up their mind that RJ is too wonderful for words.

  12. "the best way to expose a fool is to let daylight fall on them." I love it!

  13. Don't throw bricks when you live in a glass house

  14. I haven't read the book but after reading these posts I felt like leaving a comment too. I got the impression that some of you are not very polite. You complain about the one who left a negative comment but as I see it your reaction to it isn't any better.

  15. Uh, I beg to differ, Gail. There are plenty of us who have read the book, happen to disagree, yet were are still disparaged on web sites on which we've left a negative comment. There's no difference as far as you and other supporters are concerned. Anyone who disagrees must be destroyed.

  16. UH, there are people who have not read the book, Joanne for instance, who bash the book without reading a word. And there are people who disagree because they are fans of Robert Wagner. Their minds were closed before they read a word.

  17. That's a pretty closed minded statement to think that everyone who disagrees with the book had their mind already made up. If the book was that powerful, that persuasive, it would be able to sway everyone. Sorry to burst your bubble but there are plenty of us who aren't buying it.

    Based on the fact that all the media appearances are drying up, I'd say that we're in the majority.

    Other salacious celebrity books are all over the news lately, why not this one? Obviously there's something less than credible about it and plenty of us recognize that.

  18. OH Please, you hate the book, why are you here? You are Wagner fans who don't want to hear the truth. You are Wagner fan. That's why you are here.
    In the majority? LOL That's not what I'm seeing.
    The mind of Wagner's fans were made up before they read the book and you know it but you will never admit it because you want people to think you don't like the book for reasons other than Wagner. Wagner's fan could not be swayed if Wagner admitted it himself. There will be an excuse made as there is with everything connected with him that is remotely negative.

  19. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  20. Welcome Anonymous, who ever you are. I can see that this book has you upset. Wag hags all over the planet are reeling from the truths that this book reveals. Your reaction is common and typical for someone who just found out that their idol is a liar. Tough medicine, hard to swallow, but swallow you must, and swallow you will because the truth has been revealed..
    If you ever have the courage of your convictions to be identified by some other tag than 'anynomous' let me know. I'd be glad to help you through your troubled dissemination of facts.

  21. And your mother named you northernchase01?

    Considering how anyone who doesn't bow to the book is treated, can you blame a person for posting anonymously?

    I've said all I'm going to say here. Carry on with your book orgy.

  22. What is Davern's responsibility in this? Wouldn't he be an accessory after the fact?

  23. Marti's response is spot-on. Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting deleting the comment, but enabling moderation (i.e. approving comments before they appear) from now on. My concern was there may be a determined faction that planned to regularly come here and attempt to discredit Marti, even if it meant lying about facts of the case or about having read the book. I thought it would be a shame if the comments on Marti's blog started to mirror the level of discourse at the Death of Natalie Wood forum.

    But I am glad to see that hasn't happened, so it looks like moderation was not necessary. And one disadvantage of moderation is that detractors can accuse the blogger of only letting in comments that are supportive, even if that's not the case.

  24. HI All YES i agree the case was handled poorly however now things have seasoned with a bad taste ...i have been on many of fishing trips at night ect ...the water and shorelines are scary at night and filled with darkness no one would
    attempt to leave a safe haven one can not even see two feet ,,i have always beleived every relationship warnants a captian and a navagator prephaps Davern should of been the latter I can not close without mentioning the lack of concern for a search from wagner shows only guilt to hide ..sure he knows how wood got into that diry and muky ruff waters with only the unknown below her ..... cant beleive the sherffs office let that all fly ...wagners a phoney and was scared he would be kicked out the large home on canon dr at some 50 plus yrs old ..hope the truth comes out !! Ive read all the books and gives me anqish every time i feel how hard and long wood fought for her life in that scary water sure wagner is up many a night unable to sleep....i could go on however lets not forget the good wood did besides her gift of the screen she donated a wonderful columbia art collection to UCLA she was head national spokes person for UNICAF at the time of her death she paid hospitol bills for her friend crane when dying of cancer ket her mother set up for life with a income and co do what a giving person!!!