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, December 28, 2010

Message to readers

Goodbye Natalie Goodbye Splendour is a different type of book. I had no clue exactly what genres it would fall into after it was accepted for publication. It is not a biography. I did not consider it a true crime book because no arrest or legal suspicion had ever been involved in the official case. And I certainly did not consider it a book for the "Entertainment" genre. But, it fell into all three of those genres, and that's where Amazon presents it because those three categories are where its sales stem from. I accept and appreciate that people (readers) have defined GNGS.

I was so relieved that the truth of Natalie Wood's death would be available that I didn't think much beyond that ultimate accomplishment. To be honest, I didn't write GNGS with hopes of it helping to get the case reopened. It was when I emailed Dr. Lyndon Taylor to let him know it was picked-up by a publisher that he wrote back, "That's not our final goal, you know? We need to have the authorities reopen this case." I immediately agreed with him, although I thought the chances were slim of that happening. But I never underestimate anything Dr. Taylor has to say. He's an achiever. Also an achiever is the person who started the petition to have the Wood case reopened. I appreciate that emensely helpful effort and am grateful for it as the petition will add tremendous importance to the mission.

What motivated Dennis was for his truth to be told, too. When we were interviewed last year by EXTRA, it was a very intense interview. We were asked, "Do you want the case reopened?" Dennis said that he didn't. I said that I did. We were asked to explain. Dennis beleived it would hurt too many innocent people, that the truth being told may be enough. I explained that it wasn't about "other people" -- that this was about Natalie Wood and that she deserves the truth attached to her death, thus I would like to see the case reoepened. Then, Dennis was asked if he would cooperate if the authorities reoepened the case and he answered that he would, that he would polygraph for authorities, he would testify, whatever it would take, he would cooperate.

After that interview, Dennis told me that if I wanted to crusade for a reopeneing of the case, he was 100% behind me and that he had no qualms cooperating fully with the law. He said he would like to see Natalie's documented death history corrected, but he didn't think it was possible.

After I acquired Coast Guard Roger Smith's account, I felt I could never rest unless Natalie's case was reopened. After talking with Marilyn Wayne, and appreciating her frustration all over again, I realized I would pursue the reopening of the Natalie Wood case.

On Dennis's account alone, yes, there is enough evidence to reopen the case, but Dennis has had nothing to do with talking with Marilyn Wayne, Roger Smith, Detective Rasure, and many others I've interviewed. It is the side information I gathered to substantiate Dennis's claims that have motivated and driven me to not give up on this case. The Natalie Wood case is truly a travesty of justice.

I have tried to stay active with the case so that interest in it doesn't wane again, but upon its hugest spark last March (CNN's involvement) our publisher closed. The obstacles and hurdles involved in this case have been astronomical, but here I am, still at my blog, attempting to stress the importance of reopening this high-profile, bungled case.

In GNGS, I had mentioned the Natalie Wood death forum only because while I was finishing up the manuscript in 2008, I Googled Natalie Wood's name and was astounded at the debates over her death still going on after 26 years. I used that site as an example and nothing more. Since then, many of the forum's contributors have become GNGS's consistent circle of critics and many have become far too personal about GNGS's authors. That comes with the territory with virtually every controversial book. Write on . . . 

Constant bickering, however, on the topic and details of Natalie Wood's death is not how to ultimately help either side of the case. It gets as intense as it gets ridiculous (example: Jill is prettier than Natalie). I prefer those type of debates to remain elsewhere and not at my blog. If you want to talk about why Wagner waited over two hours to place a radio call, and over four hours to allow the Coast Guard to become involved, this is the place. If you want to talk about why Wagner opened his home to Dennis after Natalie died, this is the place. If you really want to know how close Dennis was to the Wagner family, this is the place. In fact, all of this information is included in GNGS, so even this blog is nothing more than a redundancy of the information already presented. But, for those with questions and afterthoughts, I maintain this blog, but no facts will be twisted here, no name-calling, and no insinuations of my truest motive which is only to see the Natalie Wood case reoepend in hopes she may acquire the justice she deserves. In the end, facts stand alone.

I condone none of the bickering over this story, none of the name-calling, and none of the nonsense. I wrote an honest, fact-filled book and I respect all reader input. I have not dictated any comments or reviews of GNGS. I will answer your questions HONESTLY, and will appreciate the courtesy to accept the honesty of my responses.  Please loan your books out, ask others to read about Natalie's ordeal, and ask them to sign the petition. That's how you can really help a case you feel strongly about, on either side of it.  Thank you.


  1. How you stay sane in the wake of all the garbage going on at that forum Marti is beyond belief. You really sound like a decent person who understands what's necessary to put up with and what's best to toss aside. More power to you. I've written a few posts at the forum, regretfully, because I see your point so clearly. There are a few people who will go at each other until the end of time over the Wood/Wagner marriage. I prefer your blog and will never post there again. It is a playground for the immature as no help for Natalie will ever come of it. The attacks on you are superficial at best and at times laughable (no disregard intended on my part). Stay the course, Marti. You're doing fine.

  2. Marti,

    I suggested GNGS to three people and they read it and each signed the petition. I always thought that was helpful, and I appreciate you recognizing how helpful it really can be. I do not post at the forum but I read it. It's a giganic mess of everyone accusing someone of being someone else. It's a riot and a total waste of time. If there's anything else I can do (or other readers of GNGS) let us know. We're with you all the way.

  3. Once you eliminate the dishonest, insane and utterly ruthless people and go back to the people who have stood with you from day one on this then I will be more than happy to come back to your blog, sign in and continue to help you fight this fight publicly instead of silently which many of us have been doing since a select few appear to have your ear now when there was a time that many of us had your back when it was needed most. This is certainly not an ultimatum and I would never disrespect you with one. I am only stating my feelings.
    A perfect example, out of the 61 members on your blog how many feel comfortable enough to log in and post now that all these raving anonymous posters are here along with a few rabble rousers who do sign in? Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

  4. This is the kind of thing I do not understand. The people who have my ear right now are not even blog members. They are working for justice for Natalie, which is my goal too. I honestly, completely don't know what you are referring to, and even various hints to whatever it is still leave me in the dark. Is there something specific? This sounds like something you are upset with that I DIDN'T do. If you feel it's necessary to ostracize me (or yourself from justice for Natalie) I respect your wishes, but please do not infer that I am the one allowing anything about this controversial subject to fester. I do my best to keep a clean blog. What people do or have done elsewhere has nothing to do with me. I have tried my best to not get involved in the bickerings of various people. The he said/she said-he did/she did things won't occupy my time ever again. I don't know how to eliminate people or go back to those I never knew had a problem with me for whatever reason to begin with. Most people post anonymously and that is fine with me. By requiring blog sign-ins, the blog is closed to people who wish to remain anonymous. When I leave it open, it requires a bit more monitoring, but at least is more inviting. Is it that I keep the blog open to anonymous posters? If so, I'm truly sorry that upsets you. I really care about getting the law to recognize the injustice of Natalie's death case. I appreciate all the help I can get for that mission. I hope people know where and how to draw the line, but if they don't, it has nothing to do with me and I would hope I do not suffer the consequences of others. I'm focused and all I can do is hope you can trust me on that.

  5. Marti,

    I'm on the East Coast. I didn't suffer the storm as badly as you did because I'm a little further south. Where I work is an hour north, and they closed today because the roads are still too dangerous to travel up there. I've been blog hopping and visiting websites all day.

    I visited another author's blog (many have them these days, a large %) and I was in a discussion about a fictional book. It got heated over FICTIONAL characters and what motivates them! I was shaking my head as I contributed to the nonsense of it all. That author's last four blog posts were about what she and her husband had for dinner at an upscale restaurant they went to in her home state. Another post was a ridiculous story about walking her dog.

    I do have a point. I like learning about authors I read, therefore I appreciate this new world of blogs and websites. I've been reading novels of all genres for decades. I have posted anonymously at your blog several times, mostly last year after reading your book. I have signed the petition.

    Here's my point. You are one of the few authors I've seen online who isn't filled with vanity, ego, self-advancement. I could care less about the other author's expensive appetizer and the new uncomfortable heels she wore on her night out.

    I enjoyed reading about your holiday wish and the little you told about your Christmas Eve tradition, but you get right back to business. An occasional photograph of your surroundings is not overdoing it either if that's what some of these people are holding against you (they should visit some of the author websites I've seen!) You contain yourself well. You present yourself in an honest and humble manner. Your temperance is appreciated. I have never left my name, my initials, or my area, until now. I really appreciated your book. I always loved Natalie Wood and always thought there was more to her death. My verdict, to be honest with you, is still out on Dennis Davern.

    GDJ, Salem County, NJ

    P.S. If you ever do a booksigning in my area, please post it at your blog.

  6. Marti,
    I have been talking about Natalie Wood's death since her death. I always thought Wagner and Walken had an argument (as was initially stated then retracted) and figured Natalie was mad and fell when running from the argument (also as presented in a biography.) It all seemed improbable, but we had nothing else to go on. I read tabloid stories but never knew how much faith to put in those. It appears the tabloids were on track afterall. If people say your book sounds tabloidish, then the tabloids sure sound bookish. I am grateful to learn about what really happened to Natalie and everything in your book makes perfect sense.

  7. That is all well and good to the poster at 3:52pm and I am certainly not doubting you but anyone can say they are from anywhere and use any initals.
    When this blog goes back to the fine way it was in the beginning then many of us who always logged in will come back.
    I for one have no issue with Marti posting personal photographs. To say otherwise is preposterous. The only issue I have is with the anonymous and rabid log ins who are poisoning this fine blog along with other other sites including Amazon's review boards.

  8. I meant Poster 6:54 P

  9. Marti, I posted a message that disappeared. P

  10. OK, I'll try again. Poster 6:54 says we should all sign in or sign up. I disagree. I follow you on Twitter and RT alot for you Marti. Hope it helps. I posted once at IMDB and was called a woman. I posted at forum and was called a troll. I've posted at you blog many times and preferred to remain private so did not sign up. I don't like being considered a rabid log in because of that. I have valid points about GNGS. I also have a question. If my original comment returns, I'll have asked it twice but here goes again: When you and Dennis first saw an attorney and you were left out of the conference, did that attorney advise Dennis to not tell you his sccount because it took many years after for him to finally tell you his whole story. Thank you, P

  11. Yes, anyone can say they are from anywhere. I can only hope that those of you posting here are sincere and I believe most every single one of you are. I appreciate the support.

    I've had a few problems at my blog but not many. GDJ, anon, an P, thank you for your comments.

    It's true many authors (most) have blogs and websites. I belong to SheWrites and most every author I associate with there has one or the other. I belong to a marketing group there, too. Publishers have really changed their way of doing things and many authors are left to their own promotions. There are many good books out there that go unnoticed because due to lack of traditional exposure. The Internet has changed everything, and some of it is not for the better.

    To Anon who mentioned the tabloids. One of the best media associations I had throughout GNGS was with two Star reporters, Brian Haugh and George Carpozi. I don't read tabloids, but they've always been fair when dealing DIRECTLY with us. George Carpozi had a #1 NY Times bestseller called "Poisen Pen" - a Kitty Kelley expose. George was dedicated to truth, and the article the Star did about the Natalie case was just as truthful as the 2000 Vanity Fair article Sam Kashner wrote after interviewing Dennis.

    P, to answer your question, I believe you are referring to our meeting with Paul Rovner in 1984. What he advised Dennis in their private meeting was to NOT do an article with the National Enquirer at that time, and we took the attorney's advice. I have never asked Dennis what else they discussed behind closed doors and I doubt he would recall now. I DO KNOW that people forget things, and all the talk about Dennis remembering things 30 years later is so ridiculous. Of course he doesn't remember conversations word for word or exactly what time they ate dinner that Friday or Saturday 30 years later. Everything I got from Dennis on those details I got right after Natalie died when everything was rather fresh in Dennis's mind. Even years later, however, Dennis has many recollections and times of clarity when things seem as if they happened yesterday to him. No one, even if drinking when it occurred, forgets a weekend like Dennis experienced Nov. 1981. As for conversations Dennis had with the Wagners throughout the years he worked for them and WAS a family friend, I probably only included a total of 1% of them in the book. And yes, to this day, Dennis remembers his conversations with Natalie in the motel room they stayed together in. How could he forget those conversations? The next morning he was identifying her body!

  12. GDJ,

    If you have any questions about Dennis, I'd be happy to answer.

  13. I just answered a question in the post "Why Wagner doesn't Refute GNGS" that I missed last week. Sorry.

  14. I've seen some people write that the same things get repeated again and again. I don't think it is a particularly fun thing to have to repeat something over and over, and I can't imagine you enjoy it much. But I feel it is important to the cause, and I guess it comes with the territory. It may be that hundreth time you wrote the same thing that it registers in someone's mind.

    I believe there are certain facts that have been brought to light via GNGS that are irrefutable. I believe that that information drives the ongoing pursuit to reopen Natalie Wood's case.

  15. There has never been a logical explanation given for Natalie's bizarre death until Dennis started offering the facts about that mysterious weekend. I can't understand how anyone could think his story is fabricated or embellished. I would've been a lot more creative if it were fiction. The polygraphist we used is top of the line, and after all of our visits with him, he wasn't as much stunned by the fact Natalie ended up in the water but more so his main question still remained: "Why didn't he do anything to save her from the ocean?"

  16. There's a human trait that causes some people to bicker endlessly about irrelevant or subjective points, especially when they can remain mostly anonymous on the Internet. Don't let the turkeys get you down!

    from KB