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.

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Natalie Wood case is not closed, nor given an official secondary ruling

The Natalie Wood case is very much alive and being investigated thoroughly. The information being reported that the case has been shut down and ruled accidental again is simply not accurate. What the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department this week announced is that the case is still considered an accidental drowning because that's what the initial ruling stipulates, meaning the initial ruling has not yet been changed. There has been no secondary ruling of accidental drowning as being reported. You would think media would do a bit more investigating, but I suppose in this "fast-food" world of news delivery, that level of journalism is a dying breed. CNN has reported this week with information closest to the truth of the matter, and I commend them for it.

The specific question the media should be asking the spokespeople from the LASD is, "Has the new investigation RULED and FILED the new findings an accidental drowning?" They would learn the answer is, "No," as there will be no definitive ruling until AFTER the new investigation is completed. Detectives are still working the case and will continue to do so for as long as it takes to investigate completely.

Last week, Steve Whitmore, who is the son of the late actor, James Whitmore, and a media spokesperson for the LA Sheriff brought me and my book, "Goodbye Natalie Goodbye Splendour," into his statement that the case has been filed a cold case and ended, further stating the reopening of the case in November 2011 was a two-day deal, based on a publicity stunt for my book, a statement I find insulting more to the department itself than to my efforts to bring Natalie Wood justice. I assure everyone, as I told Inside Edition in an interview yesterday, but this part did not air: I do not have the power to have a case of this magnitude reopened for an hour or for a year. It simply is not true that Natalie Wood's case was reopened for book publicity or for the 30th anniversary of her death. We had handed the LASD solid information and they deemed it worthy enough information to reinvestigate the case thoroughly, which they are still doing. They have plenty of "new information" on their desks and in their hands.

Within a day of Whitmore's announcement, he retracted it. That's because the case is still very much alive.

This week, William McSweeney, Chief of Detectives at the LASD, announced the case has revealed no new information but will remain open for the "small questions" lingering that need to be addressed. As I also told Inside Edition yesterday, "I had no idea there is such a thing as a 'small question' in a homicide investigation." And that's exactly what this new investigation is: a thorough homicide investigation with no filed conclusion as of yet, despite what you are hearing in the news. 

As for why there is conflicting and changing accounts stemming from the LASD is anyone's guess. From all I know and have learned, answers I've received make perfect sense, but I will not comment at this time, nor speculate on the reasoning behind these recent reports. As I await the final ruling of the new investigation, I have complete faith in the ongoing investigation. When a final ruling is available, I will comment then. I highly doubt it will be in the near future, and if it is, then it's Natalie Wood who doesn't receive what she deserves, once again.


  1. Assuming:

    1) A worst-case scenario (at the end of 11/28 argument, Wagner pushed-put Wood in the water and then ignored her pleas for help, etc.);

    2) That we were still within the CA law applicable statute periods of three to six yrs (e.g., prior to Nov 1987);

    3) And that there was some sort of smoking gun evidence, but NO RW confession.

    I wonder if-convicted, whether Wagner would have been found guilty of involuntary manslaughter, voluntary manslaughter, or 2nd degree murder. I still find it hard to believe that Michael Jackson's doctor Dr. Conrad Murray was found guilty of involuntary rather than voluntary. With the kind of lawyers Wagner could have hired, this non-legal expert is guessing he too would have gotten involuntary if found guilty.

  2. Hi Marti. Thank you for posting what is happening,I knew that what was being posted all over the internet was not true, you could tell that the facts where not right. Pam