LOS ANGELES, Jan. 22 – Superior Judge Malcolm Lucas turned down all defense motions made last Tuesday in behalf of Mrs. Linda Kasabian, 20-year-old defendant in the Tate and LaBianca murders.

However, during arguments by her attorneys, various details of the seven murders became a matter of public record for the first time.

Some of the details were in the transcript of the Grand Jury proceedings, which resulted in the murder and conspiracy indictments of Mrs. Kasabian and five others, but by court order this Grand Jury transcript was withheld from the press until 10 days after all six defendants are given copies of it.

Two of the defendants, Charles “Tex” Watson, 24, and Patricia Krenwinkel, 22, are out of state and fighting extradition to California, so normally it would be some time before the evidence on which the Grand Jury acted became known to the public.

Some of the evidence revealed Tuesday appeared in a copyrighted story attributed to Susan Denise Atkins, 21, another co-defendant, and a major witness for the prosecution, but even her gory account skipped over evidence brought out by the defense attorneys Gary Fleishman and Ronald Goldman.

These two argued before Judge Lucas that Mrs. Kasabian had left a baby behind on the Spahn ranch, when she sallied forth on two murder expeditions last Aug. 9 and 10.

They argued that Mrs. Kasabian had no choice but to do what “Tex” Watson told her to do, else she might be killed herself or might have commune leader Charles Manson kill her baby back at the ranch.

Mrs. Kasabian ran the gauntlet of TV cameras in the eighth floor corridor of the hall of justice, to be brought into Judge Lucas’ courtroom by two female deputies.

She was seven-months pregnant, and wore a white maternity smock over a gray skirt. Her brownish-blonde hair was cut short, and her delicate features were less pale than when she appeared in court at earlier hearings.

Gary Fleishman opened the legal proceedings by saying he was moving to dismiss two counts of murder and one of conspiracy against Mrs. Kasabian on the basis of insufficient evidence in the LaBianca case.

Lincoln Heights supermarket owner Leno LaBianca, 44, and his wife, Rosemary, 38, were murdered, allegedly by the Manson gang, on the night of Aug. 10 in their Los Feliz home.

Judge Lucas told Fleishman and prosecutors Aaron Stovitz and Vincent Bugliosi that he had read and considered the grand jury transcript, the court reporter’s transcript of earlier hearings, the written statements of both defense and prosecution and the points and authorities by both sides for and against the 995 motion attacking the county grand jury.

Then Lucas invited the defense to proceed, and Fleischman said: “There is no probable cause to show my client committed any act of physical violence against Leno LaBianca and Rosemary LaBianca.

“If she was in the car, she did not get out, nor was there any conversation. The only possible evidence is accessory after the fact on a wallet, and there is no evidence here except a heresay statement of where this wallet came from.

“Susan Atkins knew nothing about the wallet. In the Tate murders, Susan Atkins was a witness of what happened in that house, but in the LaBianca murders, she was only told what happened.”

Fleishman said, apparently of Miss Atkins, “this accomplice was vague. She said she had just awakened from a dream, and felt like she had taken morphine.

“There is only the hearsay statement of Charles Manson for trying to establish a conspiracy. You must take what happened afterwards — the throwing away of the wallet — an innocent wallet except for what Manson says about it.

“The law is clear that conspiracy must be proved by independent evidence, and there is no evidence except Manson’s statement.”

Fleishman then diverged into a discussion of the evidence against Mansonm saying: “When I read the evidence against Manson in the Tate murders, there is no evidence that he conspired on the Tate murders. He has a strong 995 motion in the Tate murders, and there is no tie-in of Mrs. Kasabian on the LaBianca murders.”

Fleishman then defined conspiracy, and said: “I’m aware no written contract is needed, but Mrs. Kasabian was not inside either house.

“The prosecution says she made no effort to withdraw from the conspiracy, if there was one, but there is no evidence that Mrs. Kasabian agreed to do anything. The only evidence is she got into the car. There is evidence that there was conversation in this car with one Tex Watson.

“There is evidence she went inside the fenced area (of the leased home of actress Sharon Tate, where Miss Tate and four of her associates were murdered).

“They looked for her. She apparently ran away right after the shooting of the first person. Thereupon, she took off down the hill, where they found her down the hill.”

This was apparently a reference to the shooting of Steven Parent, 18, a visitor to the caretaker on the Tate estate, who, according to the Atkins confession, was shot four times by Watson before Watson and some of the girls entered the Tate house to kill a coffee heiress, a society hairdresser and a Polish cameraman friend of movie director Roman Polanski, husband of Miss Tate.

Fleishman continued his argument on behalf of Linda Kasabian, saying: “Next thing is, she is trying to start the car. Watson tells her to move over, and to do exactly what he tells her.”

Judge Lucas asked: “Didn’t she dispose of the bloody clothing?” Fleishman responded:

“She did your honor. That is why I didn’t move to dismiss those counts in the Tate murders. It would have been a frivolous motion.

“She was in the car with the killers. She hadn’t much choice but to throw away the gun, when Watson told her to do what he told her. Otherwise, she might have her throat cut.”

Fleishman insisted that by disposing of gun, knife and bloody clothes, Mrs. Kasabian was not conspiring with the others. He continued: “I move to dismiss the LaBianca counts, because there is no more evidence against her than against a man named Clem, who was also in the car. He is unindicted.”

Deputy district attorney Vincent Bugliosi told Judge Lucas that his brief set forth all the evidence against Mrs. Kasbian, and her “aiding and abetting,” and said there was no point in his answering Fleishman’s argument verbally.

Then Bugliosi said the disposal of the wallet showed guilt by the disposing party, who was destroying evidence. He added:

“Mr. Manson’s statement of how he got the wallet and how he told Mrs. Kasabian to dispose of it is part of the conspiracy.”

Judge Lucas said he had read the grand jury transcript, which he called “ghastly,” and said the defendant’s part in the Tate episode was sufficient to hold her for trial. He said:

“She donned dark clothing and took a knife. She went on the Tate grounds. On two occasions she got out of the car and threw out the gun, knives and bloody clothing in the Benedict Canyon area.

“The next evening, she was informed that in substance, they were going to do the same thing this night, except to two separate houses. The co-defendants were armed at that time. She disposed of the wallet of the Labiancas.

“We are not deciding guilt or innocence at this time, but reasonable cause for the indictment. The court finds the evidence is sufficient. The 995 motion is denied.”

Then attorney Ronald Goldman, associated with Fleishman in the defense of Mrs. Kasabian, attacked the impartiality of the county grand jury which indicted Mrs. Kasabian.

He charged that the publicity surrounding the case was so-widespread that it was likely the jurors had a bias or prejudice against his client. He said he had subpoenaed some of the jurors, who were in court, and wanted to question all of them as to their freedom from prejudice.

Stovitz countered that the grand jury foreman inquired as to prejudice on the part of the jurors before hearing evidence, and urged them to leave the room, if they were prejudiced by earlier publicity. He said none left.

Goldman said he wanted to inquire of each grand juror as to what they had read and heard about the case, but Judge Lucas rejected this motion.

Fleishman then moved to release Mrs. Kasabian on bail, and this too was rejected after lengthy discussion.

Fleishman’s argument was that he had made the motion earlier, and it was denied without prejudice, so he could make it again. He said his client didn’t kill anybody, so it was unlikely the prosecution would ask for the death penalty for her. He said anyone not under the penalty of death is entitled to bail.

Discussing the hold the Manson commune had over Mrs. Kasabian, because of the baby, Fleishman told the judge:

“At the time these crimes were committed, Mrs. Kasabian had a small baby. That baby was left at the ranch. We have a statement by Charles Manson that he would only kill a baby if it was necessary for the future.

“It is not easy to get away from the Spahn ranch. It is not easy to get a baby away. Why did she do what she did?

“They had her baby back at the Spahn ranch. What could she do with these killers? There is substantial evidence of this girl’s complete and total innocence of these crimes.”

Stovitz rejoined that the prosecution must presume Mrs. Kasabian’s guilt at this point and oppose bail.

Goldman complained that Mrs. Kasabian had a high fever at the woman’s jail when he last visited her. He asked she be sent to a hospital ward, but Judge Lucas ordered a medical examination by the jail physician.

The judge then transferred the case to Superior Court Judge William B. Keene, and said it would resume in Dept. 107 at 9 a.m. Feb. 9.

By RIDGELY CUMMINGS