PDA

View Full Version : How do you believe Jimi died?



Pages : [1] 2

Purplz
05-22-11, 07:23 AM
I know it's a bit of a morbid question but I wanted to know what all of us, hardcore hendrix fans, think of Jimi's death.

Some additional info as to why you believe what you believe would be nice too. :)

Edit: Could a mod add the "Other (explain below)" option to the poll? Thanks

purple jim
05-22-11, 08:17 AM
On no, not again. There is a thread or two discussing this question and we await the upcoming book by Caesar Glebeek (September?) which promises to solve the case, so I can't bring myself to hit any of those buttons. He died from loneliness.

dino77
05-22-11, 08:31 AM
On no, not again. There is a thread or two discussing this question and we await the upcoming book by Caesar Glebeek (September?) which promises to solve the case, so I can't bring myself to hit any of those buttons. He died from loneliness.


Loneliness is such a drag. In essence: He died from starfuckers and hanger-ons and businessmen. But this thread kind of exists in the Conspiracy forum.

Purplz
05-22-11, 08:35 AM
On no, not again. There is a thread or two discussing this question and we await the upcoming book by Caesar Glebeek (September?) which promises to solve the case, so I can't bring myself to hit any of those buttons. He died from loneliness.

There is a thread asking CTT members their opinions about Jimi Hendrix's death?

I searched for one but couldn't find any. Please feel free to send me the link.

stplsd
05-22-11, 09:58 AM
Your poll is far to simplistic and badly worded

The "official story" is not "accident" it's: "The official verdict" and that was "open" ie not proven if it was an accident, or suicide that he took so many tablets.
Beneath that option you should insert the option "accident";-)

What do you mean by this bogus option: "accidentally killed by pills given to him by Monika?" that's very misleading vague. They were her pills, it's not disputed. Or do you mean he "accidentally died from pills given to him by Monika?" "She was negligent in some criminal way?, "It was her fault". Is leaving pills lying where he could help himself/keeping them in drawer/cupoard/ handing a packet or jar of downers to Jimi (an experienced drug taking 27 year-old) and letting him take "them" (how many?) = to "killing him" . Are you suggesting he took "them" without permission/ and/or that she didn't know he had taken "them"/ that he didn't know where she kept them until she told him/ that he asked for them and she indicated where they were/ he asked for them and she gave "them" to him and watched while he took "them" all/ that she saw him take one/a couple then went to sleep/ that she left the room came back and didn't notice how many he'd taken, or didn't even realise that he'd taken any, or was thinking of taking any/ that he asked for them and she gave him a packet at some point/ that she poured them out of a jar into his hand/ that she just happened to leave them lying where he could see them/that she fed them to him one by one/ that she force fed him/ that she put them in his food/drink - what????????????

You've also missed out several scenarios, that have been discussed umpteen times here:

He died due to Monika being incredibly stupid and/or stoned and not phoning the ambulance in time because she worried about the police finding drugs? and/or Jimi would get angry and/or and was trying to find a doctor's phone number (like they don't have a 999 equivalent in Germany? - 112)
Murdered by the FBI
Murdered by the Mafia
Murdered by the FBI/Monika
Murdered by the Mafia/Monika
Murdered by the FBI/Mafia/Monika
Murdered by the FBI/Jeffery/Monika
Murdered by the Mafia/Jeffery/Monika
Murdered by the FBI/Mafia/Monika/Jeffery
Murdered by Jeffery & other accomplices
Murdered by Jeffery/Monika & other accomplices
Murdered by the CIA
I'm sure there are more

How about 'aliens'

MourningStar
05-22-11, 12:13 PM
I'll pass

Purplz
05-22-11, 12:14 PM
Your poll is far to simplistic and badly worded

The "official story" is not "accident" it's: "The official verdict" and that was "not proven" ie not proven if it was an accident, or suicide that he took so many tablets.
Beneath that option you should insert the option "accident";-)

The official story is that he drank some wine, decided to go to bed, took some sleeping pills and then vomited in his sleep and chocked. That's what i meant by official story. The story that has become accepted as to what happened the night he died by almost everyone.

What do you mean by this bogus option: "accidentally killed by pills given to him by Monika?" that's very misleading vague.

I meant that Jimi asked for some sleeping pills because he had trouble sleeping and she gave him 9 thinking he could handle it because of his drug habits (she would have killed him because she GAVE him the pills even though there was no intent to MURDER)

(to kill:Verb: Cause the death of (a person, animal, or other living thing)

see also Criminally negligent manslaughter) Or do you mean he "accidentally died from pills given to him by Monika?" "She was negligent in some criminal way?, "It was her fault", They were her pills, it's not disputed.

Is leaving pills lying where he could help himself/keeping them in drawer/cupoard/ handing a packet or jar of downers to Jimi (an experienced drug taking 27 year-old) and letting him take "them" (how many?) = to "killing him" . That's not what i meant but even if it was, giving prescription pills to someone causing that said someone to die would classify as a Unlawful act manslaughter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter_in_English_law#Unlawful_act_manslaugh ter)

Are you suggesting he took "them" without permission/ and/or that she didn't know he had taken "them"/ that he didn't know where she kept them until she told him/ that he asked for them and she indicated where they were/ he asked for them and she gave "them" to him and watched while he took "them" all/ that she saw him take one/a couple then went to sleep/ that she left the room came back and didn't notice how many he'd taken, or didn't even realise that he'd taken any, or was thinking of taking any/ that he asked for them and she gave him a packet at some point/ that she poured them out of a jar into his hand/ that she just happened to leave them lying where he could see them/that she fed them to him one by one/ that she force fed him/ that she put them in his food/drink - what????????????

You've also missed out several scenarios, that have been discussed umpteen times here:

He died due to Monika being incredibly stupid and/or stoned and not phoning the ambulance in time because she worried about the police finding drugs? and/or Jimi would get angry and/or and was trying to find a doctor's phone number (like they don't have a 999 equivalent in Germany? - 112)
Murdered by the FBI
Murdered by the Mafia
Murdered by the FBI/Monika
Murdered by the Mafia/Monika
Murdered by the FBI/Mafia/Monika
Murdered by the FBI/Jeffery/Monika
Murdered by the Mafia/Jeffery/Monika
Murdered by the FBI/Mafia/Monika/Jeffery
Murdered by Jeffery & other accomplices
Murdered by Jeffery/Monika & other accomplices
Murdered by the CIA
I'm sure there are more


I forgot to mention some of these and there's no edit function for polls. That's why i asked a mod in the op to add an "other" option so people can voice their opinion without having a 1000 choices poll.'

Once again, stplsd, I like your post and your points but i absolutely hate your tone. Can you speak like a normal human being and drop the passive-aggressive tone?

stplsd
05-22-11, 02:18 PM
Once again, stplsd, I like your post and your points but i absolutely hate your tone. Can you speak like a normal human being and drop the passive-aggressive tone?

Sorry about the tone old chap, there is no intended tone, I'm only relatively recently aquainted with writing at any length, nevermind being au fait with internet phrasing etiquette (I'm quite old and never went to school much - pissed old fart baffled by new communication styles - grew up without computers, very late aquisition), that's maybe what some people construe as whatever, I'm not normal I'm afraid. It was always face to face in my day. ie It's wasn't just words, it's the physical nuances along with them, [ie that express 'tone'] we used to walk, a lot, almost everywhere, no/few cars/money for busses/trains;-), telephones were only occasionally used and mostly to talk to girlfriends in my teens, letters? never much into that unless girls again, but then I'd be with them anyway, so not much need. Travelling in exotic parts I would send the odd one home;-)

Still think you should have put in the coronor's "open verdict" option - my choice/vote. The wording is far too dodgy on the Monika bit, even your explanation doesn't make it too clear. If you meant "Monika gave him the 9 (or there-abouts - we don't know the exact number) tablets and by doing so was criminally negligent, to the point of being the direct agent that caused his death" (which is patent bulshit - okay - "IMHO" overly sensitive internetese people;-) it would have been better to have spelt it out rather than the far too ambiguous wording used - "I feel":-) And the "official" interpretation as you, and quite probably many others call it, is, "as I still think:-)", a misleading description, and should just be left as "accident", it's just what many conclude (hopefully most of those that don't accept the coroner's verdict, but who knows %, I don't think a CTT poll will decide, really) /or 'plump for' in preference to the alternative - suicide.

I'm fairly certain that if you put your poll up as a stand-alone on the net there would be a fairly large majority for murder (esp if you added 'by FBI/Jeffery' as a choice) - given the huge amount of garbage, sensationalist writing on Jimi's death and the apparently unquestioning acceptance by the average rock 'fan' and 'rock' commentator, judging by their responses, ie those that venture an opinion/ or misconcieved 'team/brand loyalty' "Jimi against 'them'"/ use of by conspiracy theorist pundits and their 'victims' (followers) - I do, of course, realise that 'conspiracy' has happened throughout most of human existence - born right in us.

bandit
05-22-11, 02:40 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_fMI42M3vA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYdq0ABH3so
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y2_aDVWfJc
says it all. a grave mistake. as all that understand the power of soul, it comes first through an idea and then through the word. the reality is manifested from these mechanisms.

Hendrix is not dead, his following is stronger now than it ever was when he was still around.

stplsd
05-22-11, 04:22 PM
We will never know why he took so many, quite probably it was the most common cause of overdose (barring suicide?), some alcohol, apparently not not a lot, but still possibly significant, a quite possibly advanced tolerance causing him to take a higher initial dose, which was already unsafe, coupled with forgetting he had taken them and fatally doubling/even trebling the dose. But then that would not have neccessarily proved fatal if discovered in time, ie Monika's waking at the time she did and calling an ambulance, at the time she did, excluding the more definite, fatal vomiting episode, would leave a much greater possibility of resucitation, ie survival.

That speculation is to of course exclude that Caesar has maybe come up with better testimony/evidence/interpretation of the existing thereof. We'll see.

stplsd
05-22-11, 04:59 PM
Hendrix is not dead, his following is stronger now than it ever was when he was still around.

He is gone but increasingly appreciated I would say. And not because of this pathetic conspiracy/murder shite, but because of the increased understanding and appreciation of his music, due partly to a hugely higher percentage of the population having taken 'psychoactive' drugs for recreation, but mostly due to those that love his music consistently promoting it over the generations, his only major fall away in credibility being the long, dark Douglas years , "I will sell my soul to the devil (Warner's corporation) and re-create Jimi's last studio recordings to suit the percieved market image of the average American 'rock' purchasing 'unit' (and make a fast buck)- ie numb, 'square', cocaine/speed/smack (if they took any), non psyche, 'sophisticated' - ie 'let's wear suits again', disco shite" (ie the 'yuppie' market) era which almost destroyed Jimi's 'legacy'/reputation/image/street cred/woteva, before Mr. D was kicked off his, looks like, and eventually released some of his hoards of relatively un-tampered wth live stuff, and the increasingly (after 'E' Hendrix was like involved/invoked, as a symbol, on clothes etc. but only rarely actually being in 'the mix' musicaly although snippets of Haze, Foxy, would be mixed in, then there was 'Voodoo Chile' (by 'Kiss The Sky') etc. I even heard one time a bit of EXP dialogue! musically sophisticated youth of succeeding generations therefore becoming more aware of it and finding much of it very enjoyable, often surprised that so much of it doesn't sound 'dated' (death) at all, in fact to many - still inspirational (obviously I'm talkin' bout his classics here, not the later 'fans only' stuff), unlike a lot of other music from that era does to them (Cream, Doors, Dead etc. esp the 'Douglas trilogy' and his last abysmal effort.
Mind you I have to admit the Curtis Knight mix for Wimbledon last year just hit the spot! Never realised how closed my mind had become to the possibility,

MourningStar
05-22-11, 05:57 PM
129 views and only 2 votes, .... hmmmmm.

Purplz
05-22-11, 07:34 PM
129 views and only 2 votes, .... hmmmmm.


Yeah, i wish I could edit the poll.

I created this thread in a rush after waking up because I came up with the idea right before falling asleep so I thought i'd have forgotten it.

I just wanted to know the opinion of my fellow CTTers ;)

Dolly Dagger
05-22-11, 07:57 PM
Very depressing for me to think about. I think he just took too many pills and slipped away.

And there is (seemingly) no way for me to edit in another choice.

stplsd
05-23-11, 01:18 AM
Yeah, i wish I could edit the poll.

What's to stop you?
Not that I think many here would take part anyway? They've already 'voted' at u no where
Or as MS suggested you could grab a beer etc. and wade your way through the ocean of conspiracy "debate" (Caesar's obviously thinking he will make a killing;-) at: http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?864-The-Jimi-Hendrix-Political-Harassment-Kidnap-and-Murder-Experience
and calculate the percentage in favour of whatever

trampledunderfoot
05-23-11, 01:38 AM
He died due to Monika being incredibly stupid and/or stoned and not phoning the ambulance in time because she worried about the police finding drugs? and/or Jimi would get angry and/or and was trying to find a doctor's phone number (like they don't have a 999 equivalent in Germany? - 112)


In your thread, stplsd, isn't there a quote from one of the doctors which says he most likely would have died anyway due to the amount of barbiturates in his system? Something about his heart not being able to handle that many?

Also: I buy the "official" story - essentially an accidental overdose of the pills. It seems fairly consistant with what my mother has told me about similar cases she's seen.

stplsd
05-23-11, 01:51 AM
In your thread [...] I buy the "official" story - essentially an accidental overdose of the pills. It seems fairly consistant with what my mother has told me about similar cases she's seen.

What thread?

ie not the official verdict, but the 'story' percieved to be a majority opinion by some.
I take it your mother is/was a doctor/nurse/other health care provider?

An all to common occurrence hence the use of barbiturates being discontinued as a prescription once safer drugs became available

trampledunderfoot
05-23-11, 02:00 AM
ie not the official verdict, but the 'story' percieved to be a majority opinion by some. I take it your mother was a doctor/nurse?

An all to common occurence hence the use of barbiturates being discontinued once safer drugs became available

What's the "official verdict," then? And yes, my mother is a nurse - like I've said in another thread, it's alarming how often (and easy) it is/was for people to overdose on such drugs.

stplsd
05-23-11, 08:56 AM
See above, the seldom used "open verdict" ie the Scottish verdict: "not proven", insufficient evidence as to say why he took so many tablets. ie not possible to declare accident, or suicide. The same verdict as Keith Moon. Moon was supposed to take no more than 3 Heminevrin (a sedative) a day, he had taken 32 when he died.

Ezy Rider
05-23-11, 10:00 AM
not possible to declare accident, or suicide.

or who fed the pills.

just for completeness.

trampledunderfoot
05-23-11, 10:35 AM
See above, the seldom used "open verdict" ie the Scottish verdict: "not proven", insufficient evidence as to say why he took so many tablets. ie not possible to declare accident, or suicide. The same as Keith Moon.

Oh! Okay. Thanks.


or who fed the pills.

just for completeness.

Lol. Has anyone ever blamed any diabolical entities?

stplsd
05-23-11, 11:24 AM
or who fed the pills.

just for completeness.

What's your problem? No the verdict does not include that option, it means exactly what I said. If there had been any suspicion of another party being involved, he would have been obliged to bring in the CID.

Fenders Fingers
05-23-11, 02:46 PM
There are three things that jump out at me as big indicators of murder: (not to mention the 9 pills and wine after death)
1) Jimi died around 5:30AM
2) the ambulance was called after 11AM
3) MD's statements changed every time she spoke

Supposedly the big delay on calling the ambulance was to allow time for certain people to clean up the place before the police arrived.

It's a damned hotel room. They had time to change the carpet and paint the joint. They didn't need nearly 6 hours to clean up.

The lack of police investigation also strikes me as strange, but that was after Jimi's death and had nothing to do directly with how he died.

It's weird...more possibilities than a kaleidoscope.

Opinion and speculation. Your () is enough to support my comment.
What fun we have here. Nothing new on the table so nothing to consider.
I think it's a subject so close to all of us that it might be best left alone unless someone can bring something new and factual to the debate.

Fenders Fingers
05-23-11, 02:47 PM
Oh yeah, no vote from me, sorry.

trampledunderfoot
05-23-11, 02:53 PM
There are three things that jump out at me as big indicators of murder: (not to mention the 9 pills and wine after death)
1) Jimi died around 5:30AM
2) the ambulance was called after 11AM
3) MD's statements changed every time she spoke

Supposedly the big delay on calling the ambulance was to allow time for certain people to clean up the place before the police arrived.

It's a damned hotel room. They had time to change the carpet and paint the joint. They didn't need nearly 6 hours to clean up.

The lack of police investigation also strikes me as strange, but that was after Jimi's death and had nothing to do directly with how he died.

It's weird...more possibilities than a kaleidoscope.

I don't think it necessarily points to murder...perhaps some sort of negligence on Dannemann's part. It's hard to judge when almost everyone's statements change - save for a few of the professionals involved - everytime they're interviewed...

The wine thing seems weird to me, especially when only one person mentioned it, and he seems a disreputable character.

kdion11
05-23-11, 04:13 PM
Loneliness is such a drag. In essence: He died from starfuckers and hanger-ons and businessmen. But this thread kind of exists in the Conspiracy forum.

KD: Interesting that some are now looking to CG to "solve the case". At the time of the publication
of Electric Gypsy, the response from the Univibes camp on the inconsistencies in the reporting of Jimi's
death as portrayed in the book were simply brushed off with a very patronizing "We would rather concentrate
on the positive aspects of Jimi's life and work, blah blah blah ...... etc, etc." (paraphrasing here of course).

Time flies !

susep73
05-23-11, 07:55 PM
intuitively my gut tells me Monika killed Jimi, directly(gave him extra pills then poured wine down his throat) or indirectly(gave him extra pills, Jimi got sick then went into panic and tried to cover). Its possible Jimi took the pills himself, we'll never know obviously. In a way based on the Moroccan incident and other truths Jimi held to be self evident related to his mortality, Jimi certainly had more of a Thanatos then Eros.

Ezy Rider
05-23-11, 11:54 PM
What's your problem?

inconsistency in your reasoning. As we are now all members of the CTT "PI squad" here and I believe we have to be open to and investigate all reasonable possibilities or scenarios (so that doesn't include extra-terrestrials, voodoo curses etc, sorry).

If somebody is lying at the bottom of the canyon, dead, we can say for sure it was an accident or it was suicide. But when we know there was also somebody else at the time of death, another logical possibility would be that this person tipped him over, on purpose or not. What the coroner eventually puts down in his report (open verdict) is another matter.

MourningStar
05-23-11, 11:59 PM
What's your problem?inconsistency in your reasoning. ...roller1

stplsd
05-24-11, 05:37 AM
inconsistency in your reasoning. What the coroner eventually puts down in his report (open verdict) is another matter.

There is no "inconsistency in my reasoning" as regards the meaning of the coroner's report in this case: "Westminster coroner Dr Gavin Thurston recorded an open verdict [...] He said the only indication of suicide was that Hendrix had taken an excessive number of tablets.
'But I don't feel it would be safe to regard this on its own as evidence of deliberate inten­tion to take his own life' he said."
Logic dictates then, that your problem with "inconsistency of reasoning" is with the autopsy, the police, and the coroner, as non of them felt they had seen or heard anything that implicated a second party being actively involved in his death. Monika's only involvement being that the tablets were prescribed to her and that she was in the flat, that she had rented.


I believe we have to be open to and investigate all reasonable possibilities or scenarios

I suggest you check out 'the Jimi Hendrix Political Harassment, Kidnap and Murder Experience' thread then, there's no shortage of "possibilities or scenarios" there;-)http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?864-The-Jimi-Hendrix-Political-Harassment-Kidnap-and-Murder-Experience

stplsd
05-24-11, 08:03 AM
Moon was Paul McCartney's guest at a film preview of The Buddy Holly Story and party on the evening of 6 September 1978 [where he most probably took some Clomethiazole (Heminevrin) pills, he may well have taken some earlier as well] and had a couple of glasses of champagne. At 4:30 am, Moon and his girlfriend, Annette Walter-Lax, returned to a flat on loan from Harry Nilsson, in Mayfair in which Cass Elliot had died (heart attack, blamed on her severe dieting/binging cycle) a little more than four years earlier. He took some more pills while watching the Vincent Price horror movie The Abominable Dr. Phibes, he went to sleep. Because he began to snore, Annette left the room to sleep on the couch. A few hours later, he woke up, took more pills washed down with a little champagne. He fell asleep again, he awoke again later that morning, Moon asked her to make breakfast, being uncommonly hungry as he had been the previous night. He ate and went back to sleep, dying sometime that day of an overdose. The autopsy revealed he had taken the equivalent of 32 Heminevrin pills. The medication was a sedative he had been prescribed to alleviate his alcohol withdrawal symptoms as he tried to dry out on his own at home; However, Clomethiazole is specifically contraindicated for unsupervised home detox because of its addictiveness, ie tendency to rapidly induce drug tolerance and dangerously high risk of death when mixed with alcohol [ie like barbs].

An open verdict was recorded, like Hendrix there was no suspicion that a second party may have been involved

Ezy Rider
05-24-11, 08:29 AM
interesting but I don't see an exact parallel with Hendrix's case except for the same verdict and an overdose. I am not familiar with Moon and his personal life, but it appears he was with his girl friend and the various stages of what happened that night are very well know.

In Hendrix's case by contrast, we have no clear time schedule what happened when that night, and MD was NOT his girlfriend, he was just hiding with her, and depending on how you interpret the poem A Wink of an Eye ("until we meet again") he dumped her that night, the poem which for curious reasons was taken away by Burdon and then resurfaced two days later. The entire scene was apparently swept clean from any evidence and nobody was there.

Taking the statement of a coronor as a starting point of one's reasoning and then make inferences from that premises on the possible cause of a death is a bit shaky. I would start the other way around: think of the possible scenarios that could have lead to such an outcome.

BTW I saw you now include "suicide" as a possibility (well, your interpretation of the coroners verdict), and I don't remember that having ever been an option. What did change your mind? Why would Hendrix have killed himself?

stplsd
05-24-11, 08:49 AM
interesting but I don't see an exact parallel
I never claimed it was 'exact', but it is a 'parallel', a pretty freaking close scenario as to how someone may ''absentmindedly''/"recklessly" take too many pills, after a party, arriving back at someone else's flat at almost the same time, with a girlfriend, who claims she made him some food not long before he died.


BTW I saw you now include "suicide" as a possibility (well, your interpretation of the coroners verdict), and I don't remember that having ever been an option. What did change your mind? Why would Hendrix have killed himself?

I haven't "now" included anything, it was always there, that's why it was an open verdict. My mind hasn't changed. It's not "my interpretation" of the coroner's verdict, it is the coroner's verdict (ie his "reasoning"). Read what he said, maybe you didn't see it, but I posted a report of it above, why not refer to it?


Taking the statement of a coronor as a starting point of one's reasoning and then make inferences from that premises on the possible cause of a death is a bit shaky.

It's not the "starting point of my reasoning." I am pointing out that your attempt to make more of the coroner's verdict than is there, ie that he felt involvement of a 2nd party may have been a possibility does not fit.
Whatever your or my point of view on how he died is a different matter


I would start the other way around: think of the possible scenarios that could have lead to such an outcome.

Feel free, there's a thread devoted to it: 'the Jimi Hendrix Political Harassment, Kidnap and Murder Experience' http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?864-The-Jimi-Hendrix-Political-Harassment-Kidnap-and-Murder-Experience

stplsd
05-24-11, 10:57 AM
And if he did, why would someone pour wine down his throat after he was dead? Suicide isn't an option, IMO.

If you feel like finding out about/discussing the bogus "wine" story, and all the other rubbish surrounding his death, there's a thread devoted to it here: 'the Jimi Hendrix Political Harassment, Kidnap and Murder Experience' http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?864-The-Jimi-Hendrix-Political-Harassment-Kidnap-and-Murder-Experience

MourningStar
05-24-11, 11:09 AM
I just wanted to know the opinion of my fellow CTTersyou don't need a poll for that, just grab a beer or your favorite beverage, something to much on and indulge this thread :

The Jimi Hendrix Political Harassment Kidnap and Murder Experience (http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?864-The-Jimi-Hendrix-Political-Harassment-Kidnap-and-Murder-Experience)


... be prepared for laughs, thrills and spills (yes, we had one or two who got a little too much excitement and had to have temporary time-outs)!

man, those were the days, ey Scott? Scott? (man, where IS that dude-I miss him)

haw haw!

dino77
05-24-11, 12:28 PM
I never claimed it was 'exact', but it is a 'parallel', a pretty freaking close scenario as to how someone may ''absentmindedly''/"recklessly" take too many pills, after a party, arriving back at someone else's flat at almost the same time, with a girlfriend, who claims she made him some food not long before he died.

[/URL]
I see a strong parallell; maybe Jimi took some pills, thought "this shit don't work" and took some more pills later without knowing their strength.

MourningStar
05-24-11, 12:48 PM
I see a strong parallell ...Me too, like Adam, those two Eve's did 'em in!

stplsd
05-24-11, 02:02 PM
That was the idea...to make it look/appear accidental.

Not the place as already pointed out to you, there's a thread devoted to it that has hashed out all "your ideas" over & over already: 'the Jimi Hendrix Political Harassment, Kidnap and Murder Experience' http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthr...der-Experience (http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?864-The-Jimi-Hendrix-Political-Harassment-Kidnap-and-Murder-Experience)

stplsd
05-24-11, 02:08 PM
I see a strong parallell; maybe Jimi took some pills, thought "this shit don't work" and took some more pills later without knowing their strength.

You should know better;-) there's a thread devoted to it: 'the Jimi Hendrix Political Harassment, Kidnap and Murder Experience' http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthr...der-Experience (http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?864-The-Jimi-Hendrix-Political-Harassment-Kidnap-and-Murder-Experience)

stplsd
05-24-11, 02:27 PM
KD: Interesting that some are now looking to CG to "solve the case". At the time of the publication
of Electric Gypsy, the response from the Univibes camp on the inconsistencies in the reporting of Jimi's
death as portrayed in the book were simply brushed off with a very patronizing "We would rather concentrate
on the positive aspects of Jimi's life and work, blah blah blah ...... etc, etc." (paraphrasing here of course).

Time flies !
Well, more like the huge interest in the "debate" at CTT forced him to "finally" attempt to make the case clear as far he can (or make him think he could [probably] make some cash out of this?). It must be a f'in chore, though. What's 'patronizing' about his book? it is by far the best book ever written on Hendrix by a huge mark, and it was written 12 years ago, since then obviously more info has turned up, things have changed. Look at what was on offer prior? and since? okay a couple of 'since' books have added some detail/understanding - but really not much, most of it has come through Caesar's own Univibes and (from a [gratefully] well different stance) the most excellent Jimpress, anyway.

stplsd
05-24-11, 02:54 PM
That was the idea...to make it look/appear accidental.

Not the place as already pointed out to you, there's a thread devoted to it that has hashed out all "your ideas" over & over already: 'the Jimi Hendrix Political Harassment, Kidnap and Murder Experience' http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthr...der-Experience (http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?864-The-Jimi-Hendrix-Political-Harassment-Kidnap-and-Murder-Experience)[/QUOTE]



Maybe the hospital figured they'd remain in the hospital business and let the media go uncorrected.

It may come as a surprise to you, but many countries, including the UK, operate a state run 'healthcare for all' system, that is not a private "business" capital venture, only accessible to those with cash/exhorbitant private healthcare insurance - often not enough to cover serious care, which is the major cause of bankruptcy in the US.

danksquad
05-24-11, 04:09 PM
For those who are genuinely interested in this topic, I suggest reading Tony Brown's now out of print book "Hendrix: The Final Days".

http://www.amazon.com/Jimi-Hendrix-Final-Tony-Brown/dp/0711952388/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1306267605&sr=1-1

stplsd
05-24-11, 04:18 PM
For those who are genuinely interested in this topic, I suggest reading Tony Brown's now out of print book "Hendrix: The Final Days".

http://www.amazon.com/Jimi-Hendrix-Final-Tony-Brown/dp/0711952388/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1306267605&sr=1-1
^
But bear in mind it's full of errors, dodgy interpretation, and lack of references, no index, or notes. But still by far the best (well, it's the only one, really:-) - we'll see how Caesar matches up;-)

kdion11
05-25-11, 02:45 PM
Well, more like the huge interest in the "debate" at CTT forced him to "finally" attempt to make the case clear as far he can (or make him think he could [probably] make some cash out of this?). It must be a f'in chore, though. What's 'patronizing' about his book? it is by far the best book ever written on Hendrix by a huge mark, and it was written 12 years ago, since then obviously more info has turned up, things have changed. Look at what was on offer prior? and since? okay a couple of 'since' books have added some detail/understanding - but really not much, most of it has come through Caesar's own Univibes and (from a [gratefully] well different stance) the most excellent Jimpress, anyway.

KD: Nothing is "patronizing" about the book - it's just inaccurate in places - especially the sad ending ! What was condescending and patronizing was their response to questions about their mis-interpretation of Jimi's death in the book. Actually, it wasn't written 12 years ago either, more like 20 ! Making it pretty much out of date by this point.

The book was mostly written by Harry Shapiro too - with CG supplying the archival material and detail
(along with a very uncredited and pissed off Tony Brown too BTW). Having recently been in touch with Harry Shapiro he told me he has no interest or time to update Electric Gypsy.

zombywoof57
05-25-11, 04:00 PM
I'll pass
I'll Pass Too

MourningStar
05-25-11, 06:30 PM
I figured it out.

Jimi was so far ahead of his time that he died of old age at 27.

Not intended in poor taste...the Man himself might even get a chuckle out of it.actually :

Scientists just mapped Hendrix's genetic print and discovered that he is a 7,000 year-old extraterrestrial being, made out of lightning and the "corpse" that was purported to be that of Hendrix was a manifested shell that he left behind on a whim - because his work was done on this planet.

stplsd
05-25-11, 08:51 PM
it's just inaccurate in places - especially the sad ending ! What was condescending and patronizing was their response to questions about their mis-interpretation of Jimi's death in the book.

And what is "their 'mis-interpretation' of Jimi's death in the book"?


Making it pretty much out of date by this point.
For sure, but nobody's written an updated bio yet. Well, one that's any use that is.

danksquad
05-26-11, 03:28 PM
Without going into any specifics, I believe that ultimately 3 factors contributed to the untimely loss of Jimi Hendrix:

1. Fame
2. Greed
3. A lifestyle of excess (drugs, women, and touring)

While these factors seem to have been present in Jimi's life from the start of his days with the Experience, their negative effect on his health and well being seemed to multiply with each passing day from 1966-1970, creating a "quickening" effect which lead him directly to the events that transpired on the morning of September 18th, 1970.

breathe
05-26-11, 05:43 PM
How old was Monika at the time? Practically just a child still. I think Jimi took the stuff that he did, then choked while sleeping and intoxicated. She had no clue what to do and worried about him being angry with getting any press, thought he was superhuman, and unwittingly allowed him to choke to death. Also perhaps pouring wine into him in an effort to wake him. Unfortunate.
This is what I truly believe. It was an accident. Bottom line though, if he didn't do any drugs or alcohol, he would still be alive today.

PS. I know someone will say that this should be in the murder political thread, but after reading all the above comments, I can't resist commenting myself.

kdion11
05-26-11, 06:17 PM
[QUOTE=stplsd;53375]And what is "their 'mis-interpretation' of Jimi's death in the book"?


QUOTE]

KD: Quoting Monika's fairy tale of what went down, of course. Read the book !

MourningStar
05-26-11, 07:18 PM
... Bottom line though, if he didn't do any drugs or alcohol, he would still be alive today. ...well, at least the odds would have been vastly greater - good point.

Sharpstat
05-27-11, 12:41 AM
Simply because you don't want to be blamed for his death either accidental or intentional. Think like a young 20 something year old girl trying to be independent, not much to draw on as far as life experience. There's a thread for this already!

Ezy Rider
05-27-11, 06:50 AM
I think about Hendrix.

If an ambulance was called in time, if he had slept on his side, if he was rolled over, if . . .

MourningStar
05-27-11, 10:21 AM
I think about Hendrix.

If an ambulance was called in time, if he had slept on his side, if he was rolled over, if . . .. . . if he'd never used drugs or alcohol ...

Herman Cherusken
05-28-11, 12:16 AM
Lmao, is this subject up for discussion again?! Anyone curious could read through the already existing thread and tire him/herself to sleep reading it. In any case, there's a lot of "if he only" mentioned here, but his death was just a matter of time as he clearly lived on the edge - and he had at least two close encounters of a similar death earlier, but at those times he was lucky enough to have chicks around with sharper tools in their sheds than the scary skater from hell (who gave Jimi the kiss of death) and could prevent a premature death.

He blessed us with four intense years of music, and what happened happened. I understand the curiosity, but as someone usually says here at the forum, move on folks, nothing here to see. Listen to his beautiful, intriguing, and mindblowing music and try to expand your minds and way of thinking. Don't waste your energies on things we don't entirely know or can not change anyways...

zombywoof57
05-28-11, 12:26 AM
Lmao, is this subject up for discussion again?! Anyone curious could read through the already existing thread and tire him/herself to sleep reading it. In any case, there's a lot of "if he only" mentioned here, but his death was just a matter of time as he clearly lived on the edge - and he had at least two close encounters of a similar death earlier, but at those times he was lucky enough to have chicks around with sharper tools in their sheds than the scary skater from hell (who gave Jimi the kiss of death) and could prevent a premature death.

He blessed us with four intense years of music, and what happened happened. I understand the curiosity, but as someone usually says here at the forum, move on folks, nothing here to see. Listen to his beautiful, intriguing, and mindblowing music and try to expand your minds and way of thinking. Don't waste your energies on things we don't entirely know or can not change anyways...
agreed

stplsd
05-28-11, 06:01 AM
And what is "their 'mis-interpretation' of Jimi's death in the book"?

KD: Quoting Monika's fairy tale of what went down, of course. Read the book !

I have read the book, several times. Have to disagree with your interpretation of that part of the book, that it was a mis-interpretation. Her story was certainly no fairytale that's for sure, it was a nightmare, but to not quote her would have left a large gap (she was after all the sole witness to much of it).
As to how far you feel her story differs from your alternative view of events? See you know where;-)

They cover all the main angles, including the possibility of suicide & others with conflicting testimony (at that time). They don't claim Monika's description of events as fact, they are merely reporting what she said , they even write: "Monika alleges", but it seems they don't see anything suspicious in her statements etc.
There was no P. C. Ian Smith statement, no ambulance men testimonies, no Bannister letter's, at that time, and Harvey the party host hadn't been identified either.
This book is a popular and definitive biography focussing on his life and legacy, with lots of extra valuable info and rare photos, for fans.
ie The authors were not pursuing Monika through an apparently bitter defamation case as others were a short time later, nor an investigation into a "suspicious death", or a sensationalist, conspiracy, potboiler. They, (like the ambulance men, doctors, pathologist, police and coroner), saw no evidence for suspicion of murder. And they came to the conclusion it was almost certainly an accident, rather than suicide.

MourningStar
05-28-11, 01:11 PM
... And they came to the conclusion it was almost certainly an accident, rather than suicide.... 'almost certainly' - http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/crzy1.gif

- whatever, ... Hendrix death certificate has not been modified and still declares "open verdict".

Fenders Fingers
05-28-11, 03:06 PM
And that's a FACT.
Shall we move on? ........................................... well until CG re-opens the debate ............................. debate? LMFAO.

manfree
05-29-11, 10:18 AM
He was a Silly Cunt who Fucked up taking too many pills, and denied us - His fans, the chance to say"He was better in the Early Years" I`ll never forgive Him for denying me the chance to Slag Him Off.

Vibratory
05-31-11, 04:20 PM
uuuuuuurh?

Fenders Fingers
05-31-11, 04:49 PM
^
+1

breathe
06-01-11, 11:32 AM
Lmao, is this subject up for discussion again?! Anyone curious could read through the already existing thread and tire him/herself to sleep reading it. In any case, there's a lot of "if he only" mentioned here, but his death was just a matter of time as he clearly lived on the edge - and he had at least two close encounters of a similar death earlier, but at those times he was lucky enough to have chicks around with sharper tools in their sheds than the scary skater from hell (who gave Jimi the kiss of death) and could prevent a premature death.

He blessed us with four intense years of music, and what happened happened. I understand the curiosity, but as someone usually says here at the forum, move on folks, nothing here to see. Listen to his beautiful, intriguing, and mindblowing music and try to expand your minds and way of thinking. Don't waste your energies on things we don't entirely know or can not change anyways...


I think you're fighting a losing battle. This debate is going to last forever until someone goes back in a time and prevents his death. After all you can't change or control other people. I found the entire thread very interesting, and I will continue to find it interesting forever. People miss things.

breathe
06-01-11, 11:36 AM
When were his two other near death experiences? I don't recall reading that or forgot about it. I'm going to have to check that out.

stplsd
06-01-11, 02:41 PM
^
Chapter 4,392.2, Carmen Borrero, and, oh, f'k forgot the other one. 'Fraid you'll have to check out the whole horrible mess. If you really wanna know;-)

kdion11
06-01-11, 06:09 PM
^
Chapter 4,392.2, Carmen Borrero, and, oh, f'k forgot the other one. 'Fraid you'll have to check out the whole horrible mess. If you really wanna know;-)

KD: Hey STPLSD - yes, Carmen Borrero was one, and Fayne Pridgon the other. Way back in the pre-experience days too.

MourningStar
06-01-11, 06:25 PM
When were his two other near death experiences?Great question. I've 3 children who were teenagers all through the 90's, so I pretty much had near death experiences on a daily basis back then. Nowadays, I have them less often, usually holidays and family events.

breathe
06-02-11, 06:48 AM
Lmao, is this subject up for discussion again?! Anyone curious could read through the already existing thread and tire him/herself to sleep reading it. In any case, there's a lot of "if he only" mentioned here, but his death was just a matter of time as he clearly lived on the edge - and he had at least two close encounters of a similar death earlier, but at those times he was lucky enough to have chicks around with sharper tools in their sheds than the scary skater from hell (who gave Jimi the kiss of death) and could prevent a premature death.

He blessed us with four intense years of music, and what happened happened. I understand the curiosity, but as someone usually says here at the forum, move on folks, nothing here to see. Listen to his beautiful, intriguing, and mindblowing music and try to expand your minds and way of thinking. Don't waste your energies on things we don't entirely know or can not change anyways...

You know what? On second thought, you are right. This is a mess and a waste of energy!

Scrum Drum
06-02-11, 04:07 PM
I voted Jeffery murdered Jimi but agree with stplsd that the categories have to be more precisely defined. There is the possibility Jeffery wasn't there but ordered it, like with the kidnapping.

The majority who vote for the official story have a problem. Since the official story was based on Monika's already-disproven account, that means it can't be true. So those people who vote for the official story are voting for something that has long-ago been disqualified. A look in to the true facts of this case would show Burdon said Monika called him "as the first light of dawn was coming through my window" (And maybe even earlier). If you check the London Almanac this had to be about 5:45am on Sept 18th. If we calculate the shock and panic time and other efforts Monika made to get help we can safely assume Monika first got busy at reaching out for help as early as 5:15am. Since Jimi got back to the Samarkand at a little after 3am we can therefore say that the real time in question is the 2 hours from 3:10am to 5:15am or so. Recently there's been a significant breakthrough on this. Terry Slater admitted to a British magazine that he was across the street with Monika when the ambulance arrived. This is the first time this has been formally admitted in public. Not only does it destroy Monika's story, but the official verdict that was based upon it as well.

The Bob Levine denial is interesting however he has to explain how it relates to his numerous quotes over the years suspecting Jeffery. I personally think the Jeffery story may still be true and Bob is getting cold feet because he is too deep into it and doesn't want to look bad. Someone on the internet said Wright notarized the material he got from Levine and video-ed Levine signing the paper (I wonder why he did that?).

On the UniVibes peek into the new issue Levine says he spoke to Jeffery on the 17th by telephone. He said Jeffery was happy and making management plans for Jimi etc. He then said Jeffery told him he would be unavailable the next day due to a planned boating outing. Hmm, I wonder if Levine doesn't realize he might have caught Jeffery making a classic spook excuse for not being available?


Oh yeah, for those saying Monika may have accidentally killed Jimi by pouring wine into him while he choked realize both the ambulance attendants and Doctor Bannister said Jimi had a hard plug of vomit blocking his windpipe. The attendants said they tried to establish an airway but there was hard dry vomit blocking the way. Bannister said after he uncorked this plug of vomit "masses of red wine issued out". What this forensic is telling you is that Monika could not have poured any wine past this plug and into Jimi lungs. Some might argue that Monika drowned Jimi in wine while he struggled and before he vomited, however you have to take into account that it is highly unlikely Monika would react to Jimi struggling by deciding to murder him with 3 bottles of wine. Monika would have to be viciously homicidal to do that and all evidence doesn't really point towards it. Of course it is possible she did this and was either a plant or psycho, but I tend not to think so. Especially after reading her writings praising Jimi.

There's clues from the Samarkand that say a lot. In Inner World Of Jimi Hendrix Monika says Jimi turned to her and said he thought Devon had OD'ed him. Monika said she then ignored him. I have a problem with that because it is very unlikely that someone would hear Jimi Hendrix claim he was OD'ed and then witness him pass-out and proceed to ignore it. Monika gets around having to explain this by simply lying and saying Jimi was awake and talking at 7am when she fell asleep. Henderson said Cameron's party was attended by high class people who didn't do drugs. The Hendrix crew that was there was itching to get high but there was nothing available. Eventually Stella and Devon wangled some speed and Orange sunshine acid in an ornate metal jewelry box. Now this is important because Jimi was savvy enough about drugs to know that a hit of speed and snoot of orange sunshine was not something that would seriously overdose him - especially with Jimi's famed tolerance. So what becomes obvious is if Jimi did turn to Monika and say he thought he was OD'ed it was probably in reaction to the Vesparax that was hitting him like a hammer. Monika is a pathological liar so she probably shifted blame by trying to say Jimi accused Devon of OD'ing him. More likely Jimi didn't realize it was the Vesparax and voiced this to Monika as he felt the intense reaction. Throughout Inner World Monika tries to blame the mystery compound as being a secret drug Devon used to OD Jimi. Unfortunately Monika has a pathological unawareness of how this contrasts with her other claims that the mafia killed Hendrix or even her claim that Jimi was alive and talking at 7am. Any fool could see that Jimi couldn't turn to Monika and say he thought he was OD'ed and still be awake at 7am talking at the same time. Monika was pathological enough to not realize the sheer conflict involved with that. But she also foolishly failed to detect how any OD given to Jimi at Cameron's would have to have occurred in the first hour after returning to the Samarkand, which also precludes Monika's 7am claims. In my opinion Jimi was found fully dressed on the bed because he had been hit like a hammer by the Vesparax OD he voiced to Monika and then quickly passed-out.

Personally I find it silly to believe Monika "accidentally" poured 3 bottles of wine into Jimi's lungs. Even a child would reject that story as being ridiculous. No grown adult would pour 3 bottles of wine into an unconscious choking person without realizing the danger. Sharon Lawrence thought she had uncovered Monika admitting she poured wine into Jimi. What she failed to realize was she caught Monika making up a quick excuse for the wine by saying she washed vomit off Jimi with wine. I think what is obvious here is Monika knew Jimi was waterboarded to death with wine. She just couldn't admit it so she quickly invented the washing story and then reacted with painful moans. This explains how Monika could worship Jimi so dedicatedly in her book while fighting those who accused her. She knew she wasn't exactly guilty but never could say exactly why. When forced to do so she then ended-up dead.

donniewn
06-02-11, 04:21 PM
jimi was murdered by his road manager.he was about to fire him .jefferys was involved too.they told monica to lie or die,she was angry at him for (cheating) on her anyways.sad situation.anyone who thinks it was an accident that he puked wine all over himself knows nothing about jimi.he didn't drink friggin wine!!!
why would jimi say he would never make it back to seattle and electric ladyland.duuuuuh!
he knew he was in trouble and never bothered to hire some body guards to protect him.
saddest story of a musical genius. discovered him when i was 12 only 7 years after his death. i myself will mourn for him till i die .

breathe
06-02-11, 06:17 PM
I voted Jeffery murdered Jimi but agree with stplsd that the categories have to be more precisely defined. There is the possibility Jeffery wasn't there but ordered it, like with the kidnapping.

The majority who vote for the official story have a problem. Since the official story was based on Monika's already-disproven account, that means it can't be true. So those people who vote for the official story are voting for something that has long-ago been disqualified. A look in to the true facts of this case would show Burdon said Monika called him "as the first light of dawn was coming through my window" (And maybe even earlier). If you check the London Almanac this had to be about 5:45am on Sept 18th. If we calculate the shock and panic time and other efforts Monika made to get help we can safely assume Monika first got busy at reaching out for help as early as 5:15am. Since Jimi got back to the Samarkand at a little after 3am we can therefore say that the real time in question is the 2 hours from 3:10am to 5:15am or so. Recently there's been a significant breakthrough on this. Terry Slater admitted to a British magazine that he was across the street with Monika when the ambulance arrived. This is the first time this has been formally admitted in public. Not only does it destroy Monika's story, but the official verdict that was based upon it as well.

The Bob Levine denial is interesting however he has to explain how it relates to his numerous quotes over the years suspecting Jeffery. I personally think the Jeffery story may still be true and Bob is getting cold feet because he is too deep into it and doesn't want to look bad. Someone on the internet said Wright notarized the material he got from Levine and video-ed Levine signing the paper (I wonder why he did that?).

On the UniVibes peek into the new issue Levine says he spoke to Jeffery on the 17th by telephone. He said Jeffery was happy and making management plans for Jimi etc. He then said Jeffery told him he would be unavailable the next day due to a planned boating outing. Hmm, I wonder if Levine doesn't realize he might have caught Jeffery making a classic spook excuse for not being available?


Oh yeah, for those saying Monika may have accidentally killed Jimi by pouring wine into him while he choked realize both the ambulance attendants and Doctor Bannister said Jimi had a hard plug of vomit blocking his windpipe. The attendants said they tried to establish an airway but there was hard dry vomit blocking the way. Bannister said after he uncorked this plug of vomit "masses of red wine issued out". What this forensic is telling you is that Monika could not have poured any wine past this plug and into Jimi lungs. Some might argue that Monika drowned Jimi in wine while he struggled and before he vomited, however you have to take into account that it is highly unlikely Monika would react to Jimi struggling by deciding to murder him with 3 bottles of wine. Monika would have to be viciously homicidal to do that and all evidence doesn't really point towards it. Of course it is possible she did this and was either a plant or psycho, but I tend not to think so. Especially after reading her writings praising Jimi.

There's clues from the Samarkand that say a lot. In Inner World Of Jimi Hendrix Monika says Jimi turned to her and said he thought Devon had OD'ed him. Monika said she then ignored him. I have a problem with that because it is very unlikely that someone would hear Jimi Hendrix claim he was OD'ed and then witness him pass-out and proceed to ignore it. Monika gets around having to explain this by simply lying and saying Jimi was awake and talking at 7am when she fell asleep. Henderson said Cameron's party was attended by high class people who didn't do drugs. The Hendrix crew that was there was itching to get high but there was nothing available. Eventually Stella and Devon wangled some speed and Orange sunshine acid in an ornate metal jewelry box. Now this is important because Jimi was savvy enough about drugs to know that a hit of speed and snoot of orange sunshine was not something that would seriously overdose him - especially with Jimi's famed tolerance. So what becomes obvious is if Jimi did turn to Monika and say he thought he was OD'ed it was probably in reaction to the Vesparax that was hitting him like a hammer. Monika is a pathological liar so she probably shifted blame by trying to say Jimi accused Devon of OD'ing him. More likely Jimi didn't realize it was the Vesparax and voiced this to Monika as he felt the intense reaction. Throughout Inner World Monika tries to blame the mystery compound as being a secret drug Devon used to OD Jimi. Unfortunately Monika has a pathological unawareness of how this contrasts with her other claims that the mafia killed Hendrix or even her claim that Jimi was alive and talking at 7am. Any fool could see that Jimi couldn't turn to Monika and say he thought he was OD'ed and still be awake at 7am talking at the same time. Monika was pathological enough to not realize the sheer conflict involved with that. But she also foolishly failed to detect how any OD given to Jimi at Cameron's would have to have occurred in the first hour after returning to the Samarkand, which also precludes Monika's 7am claims. In my opinion Jimi was found fully dressed on the bed because he had been hit like a hammer by the Vesparax OD he voiced to Monika and then quickly passed-out.

Personally I find it silly to believe Monika "accidentally" poured 3 bottles of wine into Jimi's lungs. Even a child would reject that story as being ridiculous. No grown adult would pour 3 bottles of wine into an unconscious choking person without realizing the danger. Sharon Lawrence thought she had uncovered Monika admitting she poured wine into Jimi. What she failed to realize was she caught Monika making up a quick excuse for the wine by saying she washed vomit off Jimi with wine. I think what is obvious here is Monika knew Jimi was waterboarded to death with wine. She just couldn't admit it so she quickly invented the washing story and then reacted with painful moans. This explains how Monika could worship Jimi so dedicatedly in her book while fighting those who accused her. She knew she wasn't exactly guilty but never could say exactly why. When forced to do so she then ended-up dead.


Good points...I take back what I said as I reserve the right to change my opinion.

kdion11
06-02-11, 06:19 PM
jimi was murdered by his road manager.he was about to fire him .jefferys was involved too.they told monica to lie or die,she was angry at him for (cheating) on her anyways.sad situation.anyone who thinks it was an accident that he puked wine all over himself knows nothing about jimi.he didn't drink friggin wine!!!
.

KD: Photos of Jimi from his last interviews with the British press (and Keith Altham) show him drinking wine in
just about all of them - in his London hotel room. The photos of Jimi with Kathy at the Brook Street flat also
show him drinking wine.............

MourningStar
06-02-11, 06:33 PM
I voted Jeffery murdered Jimi ...well .... look who's returned to the scene of the crime. Welcome back!

Scrum Drum
06-03-11, 01:13 AM
I re-read Henderson after catching up on a lot of Hendrix reading since my last posts. After the second reading I realized Henderson was making some bold accusations only they weren't so noticeable because Henderson was trying to stay away from direct accusations to avoid being sued. One of the most important things Henderson said was, with all things considered, the road crew members must have heard a different story when they arrived than what was officially claimed. This is important because if you are paying attention Henderson is making a murder accusation there. It's common sense that the amount of drugs that could have been at the Samarkand had to be very small. Monika didn't really do drugs and people say Jimi didn't really stay at the Samarkand. So it would be reasonable to assume the amount of drugs at the Samarkand had to be only a handful or so that could be easily flushed down the toilet in 10 minutes. So unless Jimi had ordered a major drug shipment of bales of pot and kilos of cocaine on pallets I don't think it would have taken 5 hours to clean the flat of drugs. They were obviously cleaning up murder evidence and developing a cover story.

I don't think Eric will ever confess because he's too deeply involved and will only stand to incriminate himself. However I would love to hear the real story he heard when he arrived. I'm a bit tired right now but if you read Henderson and others you'll find they asked Monika if she might take care of Billy Cox at the Samarkand while he was convalescing from being dosed. They decided to put Cox up in Stickells' flat 2 blocks away instead. Henderson (or was it Tony Brown?) wrote that Jimi went from the Samarkand during those final days over to Stickells in order to visit Billy and check up on him. Now it simply beggars belief that Jimi would have walked the two blocks from the Samarkand over to Stickells and not have communicated the fact of the Samarkand's existence. He probably even phoned and told Stickells "I'll be right over because I'm at the Samarkand around the block". The more you study this the more you understand that Monika's insistence that only she and Jimi knew about the Samarkand is just her way of avoiding admitting that all those Jeffery people knew about the Samarkand. Monika is such a complete liar that you can almost safely assume the opposite of most of what she says.

Slater is also important because he made the fatal mistake of admitting he was at the Samarkand earlier that evening on the 17th in a British magazine interview in Dec 1970. He said something like "We were there earlier that evening but had no idea what would transpire later on". Now this is important because Stickells told the Inquest he had no idea Jimi was at the Samarkand and went to the Cumberland where he picked-up Slater and drove him to the Samarkand. This also beggars extreme belief because I simply can't believe Burdon called Stickells to tell him the world's most famous rock musician was in serious trouble but neglected to tell him where he was. That simply isn't believable and the Inquest never challenged them on it. But also it sounds like Stickells was trying to sell a phony alibi in order to distance himself from knowledge of the Samarkand. I don't believe Stickells. Fairchild says Stickells has stayed conspicuously away from all major Hendrix productions and writings. Jeffery, being a spook, had Jimi staked-out at the Cumberland with Slater and at the Samarkand with Stickells, and maybe even Monika. So you can begin to see the possible allegiances and pressures Burdon would have on himself to not talk. Even worse he might have to admit cowardly betrayal by going on TV and claiming Jimi committed suicide in order to divert attention from the real cause. There's real causes and reasons here to keep quiet for 40 years, the evidence however has a bad habit of showing up as a persistent ghost roaming the scene and whispering for justice...

stplsd
06-03-11, 03:54 AM
I re-read Henderson after catching up on a lot of Hendrix reading since my last posts.

You would need to, you'd self admittedly read almost nothing on Hendrix, prior to your conspiracy posts, but seemingly had read lot's of conspiracy theories and are quite possibly an author of one or two. ie Looks like you have only relatively recently become interested in Hendrix and only to fit him in to your conspiracy "theories".

Of course there is more than one "Henderson" there's his original and then there's his heavily re-written much later update;-)

I suggest you take your "theories" back over to where they belong at:
'the Jimi Hendrix Political Harassment, Kidnap and Murder Experience' http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthr...der-Experience (http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthr...der-Experience)

You know the way, the thread's still open;-)

stplsd
06-03-11, 04:53 AM
... 'almost certainly' - http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/crzy1.gif

- whatever, ... Hendrix death certificate has not been modified and still declares "open verdict".

Yes that was the authors opinion at that time. And yes the death certificate has not been modified and still declares "open verdict".

ilovejimi
06-12-11, 05:35 PM
Ive read so much over the years- Ive even changed my own opinion several times. There are so may plausable situations and almost everyone can be made to work (murder, accident) etc. I finally have to conclude Ill never know-- ive run the senerios in my head and lets just say they all cant work. We just dont have enough evidence, most of the players are dead and when they were alive- never clairfied anything of value to the point where one could say this is the definitive cause of death.

I wish though that day had never happened- point is, even if you could figure it out, our hero will not be comming back, as he does not live today (hmm Wait until tomorrow).

I will read Ceasars book- but im not holding my breath we will learn anything new-perhaps it will just fan the flames of speculation.

With that said- if it was an accident, Monika's behavoir was just flat out odd at best and her commiting suicide with I guess regarding issues involving Jimi per Kathy's lawsuit, leave me wondering even more. Anybody have any good info on that lawsuit between Monika and Kathy (I felt i never really got the full understanding of what happened there)-- if this lawsuit lead her to commit suicide- something had to be really damning in that case- otherwise it was just a run of the mill civil law suit

Here is some thing that is true: I just dont know

MourningStar
06-12-11, 09:45 PM
... However, I have had the unique opportunity to either meet, hang or shall I even dare say..."party" with the likes of Mitch, Billy, Buddy, E.Kramer, Juma, Velez, Noel, Kathy E, Karen D, Carol S, Carmen, P.Caruso, the twins, A.Douglas and many others that were in Jimi's life but it was Monika & ONLY Monika that gave me a real sincere case of the creeps. ...Hmmm, ... I don't see Mike Jeffery's name listed. I sure would be curious as to what vibes he would have given you. However, from the names you've listed, no doubt that name had to have been dropped more than once heh, heh.

Scrum Drum
06-13-11, 02:03 AM
... it was Monika & ONLY Monika that gave me a real sincere case of the creeps. Despite what good, if any, that someone out there might possibly say about her, she was definitely the one person who gave ME the worst vibes of them all. Her demeanor was just so spooky and somewhat puzzling. And, like Mitch for instance, she also showed me a fair case of paranoia too. They both had their reasons for that no doubt.


I've communicated with a man from England who knew Monika from his business relationship with Uli Roth. When he first contacted me he was defensive because he said he read what I wrote and wanted to say he knew Monika personally and that she was a good person who could never do anything bad to anyone. He also added Monika had been savagely persecuted and abused. I then proceeded to explain to him why Monika's story couldn't be true and many other things and he thanked me for making him realize things he hadn't known.

We don't why Monika was paranoid. For all we know Monika was perfectly normal and honest but witnessed something that could get her killed. Her crazy lies and false stories that were kept to long after it was foolish to do so could have been the sign of a disturbed mind or could have been a person desperately trying to avoid being harmed.

It would be good to know what Monika was witnessed wearing at Cameron's? It's a shame this wasn't properly investigated because if Burdon had witnessed Monika wearing the same clothes she had on at Cameron's it would be significant evidence. There was enough wine spilled at the death scene that Monika would have most likely not been able to avoid getting some wine stains on her clothing. If this was investigated as it should have been, if Monika had wine-free clothing it would be very unlikely she was the one who poured wine into Jimi. This would then give Tappy Wright's story more credibility.

Both Robert Kennedy and John Lennon were assassinated by CIA hypnotically programmed assassins. I'm worried that the mental disturbance everyone keeps detecting in Monika could be from having her mind compromised this way. People who knew Mark David Chapman said he was a normal likeable guy who could never hurt anyone. Yet he is also spoken of as possessing the same creepy pathological symptoms as Monika.



Anyhow, I suspect that the whole cast of characters will someday be seen & heard anyway when and/or if David Kramer ever finalizes his longtime, work-in-progress film documentary. He's definitely one guy who has succeeded (to a greater degree) in obtaining actual interviews and on video from those who were definitely and unquestionably "there" during Jimi's short life. Especially those who were around in the final days including some few who have never whispered a word to any reporter, author or fanatic to date. Finally, my personal thoughts do point directly to Monika. She [probably] fucked up royally and the guilt finally got the best of her despite that secondary Kathy E. situation. Now, I'm almost sorry that I even kept my opinion to myself and showed her total respect when I met her.


The people at the Samarkand that morning don't need to be interviewed by film crews they need to be interrogated and legally cross-examined. Stickells is clearly lying. He most likely helped Monika arrange the Samarkand seeing how it was a few blocks away from his own flat and Monika was from Germany. Even if he didn't he's making-up an obvious alibi about not knowing about the Samarkand. Jimi went from the Samarkand over to Stickells flat to visit Billy Cox. If you read the Inquest statements of the road crew members and Stickells they are obviously trying to hide their knowledge of the Samarkand. Since Slater admitted he was at the Samarkand earlier that evening you have to assume both Stickells and Jeffery knew about it. If they lied about their knowledge of the Samarkand at the Inquest they had a reason. They were trying to cover something up, and it wasn't Monika killing Jimi.

univibs
06-13-11, 03:53 AM
Both Robert Kennedy and John Lennon were assassinated by CIA hypnotically programmed assassins. by bullets.

that's not in the case with Jimi. he was murdered in a "primitive" way
CIA ? if that is the case they would have shot him, why to make it so complicated like it was if there's a gun, and to risk it all by letting Monica to be a witness

another evidence is Monica's Camera and film, I wonder if there were more photos of jimi from that day or photos taken after Jimi was dead.

morelmusic
06-13-11, 03:56 AM
Agreed. Certain folks should of-or-could of been interrogated and legally cross-examined. Absolutely. Now, I just don't know anymore. Unfortunately, Jimi's already dead 40+ long years and at the end of the day it only amounts to squat. That particular can of worms is best sealed shut and all existing energy should be put into the remote possibility of unearthing any surviving film, photo or audio still sitting in ones attic, cellar, storage or closet. Plus, no one really wants to relive that whole negative scenario anyway. Especially those who may have had any real involvement and already lived it. It's really a complete downer with the exception of this particular forum where it rolls on endlessly with various, ongoing viewpoints & that's perfectly fine. The publicity of any ongoing, negative, new death headlines in comparison to a much positive headline such as a sensational new film find is somewhat self-explanatory. Honestly?, I can almost hear Jimi mouthing that one signature statement of his: "Your living in the past!".... especially when it comes to his death. It's funny, I just reminded myself of something that Mitch once said to my old friend when he was asked quite briefly and simply about Jimi's demise: "Fuck off mate, it's none your bloody business!"

Additionally, I did find Monika quite pleasant but nothing much more. She actually seemed a bit dull, flat and monotone in comparison to someone such as Kathy E. who I found quite, amusing, animated & outgoing. Charming really. Even Carmen had a zany, sexy thing about her despite her behavior which included some loud, drunken hysteria. A genuine contrast of course. But, who knows.... Maybe Monika was really having a bad hair day. Either way, her lying about the questionable circumstances on that awful day are totally inexcusable and unexceptable. That goes for others as well and they they all know who they are. Finally, there is much that can be said by many who still survive today which will never-ever hit these message boards and no one earns zip, gets rewarded or even promoted by spilling their own constant and well detailed conspiracy theories. I already learned that fact long, long ago especially with the reminder from one Felix Pappalardi.

Run DMC said it well enough: "It's like that (what?) and that's the way it is. Huh!"

purple jim
06-13-11, 04:36 AM
It would be good to know what Monika was witnessed wearing at Cameron's? It's a shame this wasn't properly investigated because if Burdon had witnessed Monika wearing the same clothes she had on at Cameron's it would be significant evidence. There was enough wine spilled at the death scene that Monika would have most likely not been able to avoid getting some wine stains on her clothing. If this was investigated as it should have been, if Monika had wine-free clothing it would be very unlikely she was the one who poured wine into Jimi. This would then give Tappy Wright's story more credibility.

Let us not forget, brethren, that NO WINE was found all over the place on Jimi's death bed. Only vomit. Wine was not mentioned in the coroners report. Only vomit. Again, this whole "wine" thing comes from the disgraced Bannister who had a dodgy memory.

MourningStar
06-13-11, 12:12 PM
... If you read the Inquest statements of the road crew members and Stickells ...I would like to read these, are these official documents posted anywhere for public viewing?

Scrum Drum
06-13-11, 01:05 PM
Agreed. Certain folks should of-or-could of been interrogated and legally cross-examined. Absolutely. Now, I just don't know anymore. Unfortunately, Jimi's already dead 40+ long years and at the end of the day it only amounts to squat.


No, I strongly disagree. As you yourself agree above, the matter of the evidence behind Jimi Hendrix's death should be examined and pursued. A lot has been accomplished since Monika's death. I didn't even know about this until Tappy made it public. Henderson really made the first bold move, however the groups it should have inspired responded with silence. I think this is partly what motivated Tappy. I disagree that "it amounts to squat". We now have a much more narrowed-down understanding of what happened and a forensic pathology that has yet to be pursued by any credible agency.



That particular can of worms is best sealed shut and all existing energy should be put into the remote possibility of unearthing any surviving film, photo or audio still sitting in ones attic, cellar, storage or closet. Plus, no one really wants to relive that whole negative scenario anyway.


Right, people who care about Jimi and want to do justice for him are "negative" and those who blow-off his diabolical murder at the first slight breeze are "positive" - sure. All cool cats never make anyone uptight and only those who have like bad vibes man go around bothering people with the uncomfortable evidence for Jimi's murder. Yep. I've experienced a tendency in the Hendrix Community that when you press the needed points to show how Jimi was murdered people respond by saying we need to shut this down or "this topic sucks". Hmm. There's enough people hunting down remaining film footage. The murder business isn't hampering anything. If you seal this shut you do so in the face of Jimi Hendrix reaching out to us from the past and begging for justice.



Especially those who may have had any real involvement and already lived it. It's really a complete downer with the exception of this particular forum where it rolls on endlessly with various, ongoing viewpoints & that's perfectly fine. The publicity of any ongoing, negative, new death headlines in comparison to a much positive headline such as a sensational new film find is somewhat self-explanatory.


Forgive me for saying this but what you say above almost sounds like "Don't hang people up on negative things like murder just see if Jimi has any valuables in his pockets before we scoot and leave him hanging". After all, we have to worry about the feelings of people who never backed Jimi when he was murdered over Jimi himself, who it is OK to just leave there hanging as long as people aren't made to feel bad. Sorry, but the morality I've always known has a word for that and it isn't flattering. It will make you lots of friends but it will do so at Jimi's expense.




Honestly?, I can almost hear Jimi mouthing that one signature statement of his: "Your living in the past!".... especially when it comes to his death. It's funny, I just reminded myself of something that Mitch once said to my old friend when he was asked quite briefly and simply about Jimi's demise: "Fuck off mate, it's none your bloody business!"


This is what I'm talking about with the fuzzy Hendrix leprechaun land. Yeah, I'm sure Jimi would say "Hey cats don't worry about my being wickedly betrayed and murdered - just have fun and only think about yourselves"! If you really read what Jimi was saying in his quotes he was saying "We've got to tell children the truth, they don't need a whole lot of lies". He also mentioned something about breezy sliders and jellyfish without a bone their jelly back. Funny how people who would never tolerate themselves being murdered in such a wicked way are so willing to encourage disinterest at the expense of Jimi or justice for him. Funny, "living in the past" doesn't seem to stop the huge interest in Hendrix and his music 40 years later.



Finally, there is much that can be said by many who still survive today which will never-ever hit these message boards and no one earns zip, gets rewarded or even promoted by spilling their own constant and well detailed conspiracy theories. I already learned that fact long, long ago especially with the reminder from one Felix Pappalardi.

Run DMC said it well enough: "It's like that (what?) and that's the way it is. Huh!"


I don't know, man, it just sounds like excuse-making to me, I'm sorry. There's a lot that was never said that is currently on these message boards exactly because people who didn't buy that call to indifference went out and pursued it. Trust me, the people who murdered Jimi and covered it up love hearing people call for no action. The way you have to think of it is every time you call for inaction the hands that are strangling Jimi grow tighter around his neck. Sorry, but the Hendrix Community's indifference towards this is just dead weight as far getting justice for Jimi. Funny how they don't seem to mind how they serve as a negative themselves or how the case has progressed despite their efforts. I'm sure everyone wanted to curry favor with Mitch but I personally think he would respect you more if told him he was being an a**hole by answering that way. Unfortunately, it's about time people realized we are still talking about this 40 years later exactly because people took that attitude and didn't do what was necessary to defend Jimi.

People who want to defend Jimi and do justice for him are stuck in between corrupt authorities who refuse to practice what they preach and a weird celebration ethic that serves as an equal deterrent. Calling for indifference is hardly a noble position and grinds against most understood definitions of moral justice. In the end there's no difference between that position and people who come right out and say "I don't give a f***". If you listen to what Jimi said in his music he was fighting a war. If Jimi died as a brave soldier in that war and forced his adversaries to resort to scummy tactics and gutter murder it's important people know it. Geesh, I hope Hendrix fans are big enough to be able to talk straight to each other in a respectful but direct way. I think Jimi would be all for that as well - especially when it concerns his MURDER! The way you have to look at it is Jimi is being denied the high status he deserves that led to his murder. The authorities don't want to admit they kill people of peace, so they'll be all for calls for indifference. Those who call for celebrating Jimi don't realize they are helping deny what was most important about him and what Jimi himself cared for the most - if you listen carefully.

There are people out there right now who know how Jimi died. I think people know how close they are which is why they want to avoid it.

johanincr
06-13-11, 01:36 PM
There's enough people hunting down remaining film footage.

Name 5.
Otherwise, define 'enough'.
Funny comment from a guy who has posted 300+ messages about 1 subject, and hasnt the slightest interest in Hendrix' music.
Otherwise, you'd have downloaded something by now. Maybe you're not at all interested in the music....it seems like it!



Trust me, the people who murdered Jimi and covered it up love hearing people call for no action.

You must be close to those people who murdered Jimi to know that.
What action do you have in mind, or better yet, planned?

stplsd
06-13-11, 01:47 PM
another evidence is Monica's Camera and film, I wonder if there were more photos of jimi from that day or photos taken after Jimi was dead.

I think a few questions may have been asked if she had started taking snaps of his dead body at the hospital, don't you;-)?

MourningStar
06-13-11, 01:48 PM
Scrum Drum :

'Assuming' the poll here is a sampling of this Hendrix community's position, it pretty much sums up their 'concern'. You find people in your camp and you find people not in your camp. By your own admission and in your belief, the agencies in 'official authority' have enforced a total blackout. This being the case, you will forever be pontificating the murder angle with only the 'tools' you have assembled up to this point and, likewise, be in perpetual debate.

carry on,
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

(p.s. where can i view those 'inquest statements' you reference?)

stplsd
06-13-11, 04:05 PM
There are people out there right now who know how Jimi died.
Yeah, there are three left, Doctor's Siefert and Brown (the other is a disgraced ex-doctor, reprimanded for two counts of medical malpractice and struck of the medical register for fraud in 1992 (who, incidentally, came up with his story about masses of red wine -not mentioned by anyone else there at the time, or subsequently;-) - just prior to his medical tribunal verdict, and after having just found out MD had accused him of yet another case of malpractice for not performing a tracheotomy on Hendrix in 1970;-) The other two are dead: the famous pathologist & physican Dr Donald Teare FRCP, FRCPath, a co-founder of the College of Pathologists (d. Jan 1979). And the even more famous coroner Gavin Thurston cbe, frcp, frcgp, dch, dmg, Barrister at law - also an RAMC lieutenant colonel in WWII who saw service in India & NW Europe (phew!) (d. Jun 1980). These two were the top dogs in their profession, no-one was going to question their integrity in their day, top professionals didn't feel the need to write what they saw as uneccessary waffle on an, as they saw it, open and shut case (apart from Hendrix' intent when HE took the tablets.) The time of death which they would obviously know, was not of interest to them as they had made their observation that there was nothing else suspicious. Nobody saw anything, or any valid motive for suspicion of a second party being involved. No complaint was made by anyone. And, after some sensationalist press, on looking at the case again, and the "new evidence" ie to show that Monika was a liar (Kathy's, transparent, raison d'être), no one in authority saw any reason for "re-opening the case."

http://www.bmj.com/content/280/6231/1623.extract

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1597645/pdf/brmedj00058-0075.pdf

Who do we have opposing these highly qualified and experienced experts? A few conspiracy "theorists" (one and one does not equal two), 40 years later, who have nothing to support their arguments other than a bent ex-doctor, a rubbish, smutty, pulp book that used his, 22 years later, dodgy panic stricken excuses as a basis for a murder story, as the "ct's" already had anyway, "Ooh he agrees with us, see it must be true";-) the "ambulance men's statements" (as reported by UKW) for a small circulation US fanzine, but who, apparently declined to make an official statement (according to Glebeek) and an alleged comment in a well known German (gossip) "newspaper" (yet to be produced by anyone, curiously;-), if it actually exists that is, may well be a spin put on her original interview, if indeed she even gave that interview, a quite probable mis-translation and is also highly ambiguous anyway.

purple jim
06-13-11, 04:50 PM
^Well said!

Rupe
06-13-11, 05:00 PM
^Couldn't agree more!

stplsd
06-13-11, 05:29 PM
Name 5.
Otherwise, define 'enough'.
Funny comment from a guy who has posted 300+ messages about 1 subject, and hasnt the slightest interest in Hendrix' music.
Otherwise, you'd have downloaded something by now. Maybe you're not at all interested in the music....it seems like it!

Exactly. Well put




You must be close to those people who murdered Jimi to know that.
What action do you have in mind, or better yet, planned?

Another sharp observation, and question.

kdion11
06-13-11, 05:31 PM
Johanincr and MourningStar?....Thank you.
BOTH of you beat me to an extremely similar reply.

Scrum Drum:
Obviously, you have a sincere attraction to the death situation topic. No big deal really....I've seen it before. But is it not more productive for you to possibly leave the computer seat and really get out there by participating and advocating with the chosen few who really want to get so deeply involved? Especially at this time? You seem content in diving into those deep waters. I have no problem signing a petition if need be. But, getting justice done for the (possibility) of a 40 year old murder is something I cannot involve myself in. The goes for either now or then. It's simply not happening and It's not on my agenda nor my trip. I offer no apologies about that either. I have better things to do. Plus, I am NOT entirely convinced about what really happened anyway despite what you might have to say or what some 'Gypsy' author publishes in book form. Now, is it more rewarding for you to continue the topic right here on CTT by recruiting us to do just what, when and where exactly? Interesting....it almost reminds me of subliminal messaging to a certain extent. Now, don't get me wrong here my friend, It's quite interesting to hear your eyebrow raising attitude and/or detailed accounting of what you think may have happened or should happen. You seem to know many things, quite knowledgeable and possess many thought provoking theories and thoughts by providing us with the views that you post. I own just the same, but my personal preference is to stay clear of the subject when it gets to a certain point. It turns me off. Basically, I just get more aroused from sounds and visions. And by the way, is this all first hand experience by corresponding with those directly involved or something you developed over the years by educating yourself while reading books or combining the two? Excuse me, where did you say you were exactly when the now distance opportunity took place years ago re: some reissued inquest into Jimi's death?

Personally, for me, justice is totally being done to keep Jimi ALIVE and well this very day and NOT dead especially with the endless amounts of time and effort that I, for instance, already subtracted from my life which includes the non-stop contributions to a better percentage of the Jimi material over the many years which you may or may not be enjoying at this very moment. Perhaps a few others here can fill you in on what that may be. Or, I can. I give a sincere shout out to all the others in this community who do or did the same. Obviously, you all know who you are. In fact, a site keeps Jimi 100% alive and far from dead disregarding Jimi's current, physical state.

As for a Mitch? Interesting. He was his typical wise-ass, cocky arrogant self. Went I first had the opportunity to greet him, shake his hand and offer my name, his response was: "Right, sure you are mate, sure you are" (very funny Mitch) I certainly didn't hesitate to reply: "No, Mitch. I actually know my own name!..... sorry to disappoint you....care to see my identification as proof?"...ha-ha. He took one quick glance over to his then producer standing nearby and also quicly authenticated me as "harmless" with a thumbs up and lovely nod ending that stupid yet well remembered and awkward moment. Still, I muttered: "Asshole" just loud enough as I walked away. Please do consider me one of those who won't stand for that ego-maniac crap or kiss ass to any musician despite my love for his impressive drumming and obvious contributions to the music. Gee, maybe he would actually feel sorry he even acted like that if he heard my own drumming abilities which certainly includes his influence. Finally, I hope you won't consider me as a bottom of the ladder, inexperienced, collector/fanatic talking out of my ass without first hand knowledge in some areas. I already passed that stage many moons ago.


KD: Well put ! Me too as far as that

"I hope you won't consider me as a bottom of the ladder, inexperienced, collector/fanatic talking out of my ass without first hand knowledge in some areas. I already passed that stage many moons ago"

hawkfan369
06-13-11, 08:19 PM
drink1Well said morelmusic..

MourningStar
06-13-11, 08:58 PM
Johanincr and MourningStar?....Thank you.
BOTH of you beat me to an extremely similar reply.no, thank YOU!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/headbang.gif


For me, justice is being by keeping Jimi ALIVE today in our thoughts and devotion. He will never be dead to me especially with the endless amounts of time and effort that I already subtracted from my life which includes the non-stop, ongoing contributions to a better percentage of the Jimi material issued over the many years which you may or may not be enjoying at this very moment. Perhaps a few others here can fill you in on what that may be. Or, I can. I give a sincere shout out to all the others in this community who do or did the same. Obviously, you all know who you are. In fact, a site like this keeps Jimi 100% alive and far from dead disregarding Jimi's current, physical state.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/gdpit_com_63508937_104.gif

Roland Stone
06-13-11, 11:27 PM
"There’s two sockets where you can go into. One socket is death and one socket is the socket to live, you know. This is how I always felt. I think they call that a alpha jerk. You can get an alpha jerk.This is when you’ve felt as though.”Oh, wow, I’m goin’ into the wrong hole here. And you really feel funny. You feel like that possibly is the hole to die. And the other side is the side to sleep and get into your subconscious and sleep, which is what we normally go into I believe that Jimi possibly could’ve went into, got into his alpha-jerk feel and it kind of felt groovy to him because he was high, slightly high, and he said: “Damn, you know, I’m Jimi Hendrix. I wonder if I can die?” You know? And the alpha jerk came on him and he said:”Fuck it, let me try the alpha.”And slipped on out. You know?"


And that's as good an explanation of Jimi's death as we're ever going to get! It was the ALPHA JERK baby, and don't you ever forget it!

MourningStar
06-14-11, 12:31 AM
There was at least one jerk involved.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/VIDEO/fu2c5k.gif

Scrum Drum
06-14-11, 02:52 PM
Name 5.
Otherwise, define 'enough'.
Funny comment from a guy who has posted 300+ messages about 1 subject, and hasnt the slightest interest in Hendrix' music.
Otherwise, you'd have downloaded something by now. Maybe you're not at all interested in the music....it seems like it!


I used to be friends with a major collector. Honestly, I don't feel I should have to prove my fan worthiness. I have a small collection of bootlegs from the 1980's cassette-trading era. If you suspect I haven't the slightest interest in Hendrix's music you don't know how wrong you are. Really, I feel this kind of ad hominem off-topic is only due to others being unable to answer the arguments I've made. I'd like to get some Mp3's of Jimi's stuff but I'm a bit of a computer dummy and not sure if my laptop has the memory space. Right now I'm concentrating on the murder exactly because my serious interest in Hendrix makes me think it's important and needs to be dealt with now. Too many Hendrix fans don't realize how real it is. So far Crosstown Torrents offers the only decent place to discuss this on the internet (which I appreciate).



You must be close to those people who murdered Jimi to know that.
What action do you have in mind, or better yet, planned?


Nope, not the people just the evidence. Tony Brown also took concern over this and wrote 'Final Days'.

I wish I had the ability to research and write a good book on this. It really needs to be majorly done. I think Brown would have done it because the topic has been breached enough recently to get him above the libel laws he was obviously trying to steer clear of in 'Final Days'. Funny how people who are most likely to expose the topic like Monika and Brown suddenly die. Those squirrely British libel laws protect criminals and were the main reason Monika was able to avoid having to explain her lies. Right now I'm in contact with somebody who tried to pursue this 20 years ago in order to write a book. He interviewed a lot of people but ended-up hitting a brick wall of non-cooperation and never wrote the book. We're trying to get something going right now. He has good Hendrix contacts. We are also waiting for Caesar's murder issue to come out. We are in touch with Tappy and he might help us.

trampledunderfoot
06-14-11, 03:15 PM
...Both Robert Kennedy and John Lennon were assassinated by CIA hypnotically programmed assassins. I'm worried that the mental disturbance everyone keeps detecting in Monika could be from having her mind compromised this way. People who knew Mark David Chapman said he was a normal likeable guy who could never hurt anyone. Yet he is also spoken of as possessing the same creepy pathological symptoms as Monika...

Wait...what?

Fenders Fingers
06-14-11, 03:18 PM
I used to be friends with a major collector. Honestly, I don't feel I should have to prove my fan worthiness. I have a small collection of bootlegs from the 1980's cassette-trading era. If you suspect I haven't the slightest interest in Hendrix's music you don't know how wrong you are. Really, I feel this kind of ad hominem off-topic is only due to others being unable to answer the arguments I've made. I'd like to get some Mp3's of Jimi's stuff but I'm a bit of a computer dummy and not sure if my laptop has the memory space. Right now I'm concentrating on the murder exactly because my serious interest in Hendrix makes me think it's important and needs to be dealt with now. Too many Hendrix fans don't realize how real it is. So far Crosstown Torrents offers the only decent place to discuss this on the internet (which I appreciate).

Many folk here are "friends" and have a nice little collection. For the most part they do not need to DL any of the torrented material, guess what? They do so to help seed material for others .................... you know, friends.

Yes CTT is quite liberal and as such can be abused.







Nope, not the people just the evidence. Tony Brown also took concern over this and wrote 'Final Days'.

I wish I had the ability to research and write a good book on this. It really needs to be majorly done. I think Brown would have done it because the topic has been breached enough recently to get him above the libel laws he was obviously trying to steer clear of in 'Final Days'. Funny how people who are most likely to expose the topic like Monika and Brown suddenly die. Those squirrely British libel laws protect criminals and were the main reason Monika was able to avoid having to explain her lies. Right now I'm in contact with somebody who tried to pursue this 20 years ago in order to write a book. He interviewed a lot of people but ended-up hitting a brick wall of non-cooperation and never wrote the book. We're trying to get something going right now. He has good Hendrix contacts. We are also waiting for Caesar's murder issue to come out. We are in touch with Tappy and he might help us.

Funny thing about life, people die ! Sometimes even suddenly ..................... nothing new here. Or are you trying to say something SD? As for being in touch with Tosser (Tappy to you), oh dear. What credit you MAY have garnered here just flew out the window :-)

Scrum Drum
06-14-11, 03:41 PM
And by the way, is this all first hand experience by corresponding with those directly involved or something you developed over the years by educating yourself while reading books or combining the two?


Mostly books and all available sources, including internet. I've recently expanded to persons with direct contact.




Excuse me, where did you say you were exactly when the now distant opportunity took place years ago re: some reissued inquest into Jimi's death?


When it happened, a young kid playing with baseball cards and Schwinn Apple Krate bikes completely unaware of the 60's revolution around me, except for the great music coming over our transistor radios.

My Hendrix buddies were worthless and never told me about Etchingham's petition in 1992. Wish we had the internet then because Scotland Yard took advantage of Kathy. Others could have forced them to answer some questions they successfully ducked.




For me, justice is being by keeping Jimi ALIVE today in our thoughts and devotion.


Yeah, but I get the impression that you are suggesting pursuing Jimi's murder detracts from this. It doesn't. You can do both at the same time. May I remind you you share a similar position with Janie Hendrix.




As for a Mitch? Interesting. He was his typical wise-ass, cocky arrogant self. Went I first had the opportunity to greet him, shake his hand and offer my name, his response was: "Right, sure you are mate, sure you are" (very funny Mitch) I certainly didn't hesitate to reply: "No, Mitch. I actually know my own name!..... sorry to disappoint you....care to see my identification as proof?"...ha-ha. He took one quick glance over to his then producer standing nearby and also quickly authenticated me as "harmless" with a thumbs up and lovely nod ending that stupid yet well remembered and awkward moment. Still, I muttered: "Asshole" just loud enough as I walked away. Please do consider me one of those who won't stand for that ego-maniac crap or kiss ass to any musician despite my love for his impressive drumming and obvious contributions to the music. Gee, maybe he would actually feel sorry he even acted like that if he heard my own drumming abilities which certainly includes his influence. Finally, I hope you won't consider me as a bottom of the ladder, inexperienced, collector/fanatic talking out of my ass without first hand knowledge in some areas. I already passed that stage many moons ago.


My one and only experience with Mitch was climbing the grandstand behind his drum kit at the Delaware horse track in 1987 with "Electric Ladyland" and a pen and trying to get him to sign an autograph. Kinda dumb, but I thought it was my only chance in my life to meet Mitch. He proceeded to tell me to "Piss Off!" - which, come to think of it, I probably would have said too in the same circumstances. I humbly withdrew. I suppose Mitch was the one mumbling "Asshole" as I left lol. I later met him in the club house and he was friendly enough and signed my album along with Noel. Damn! I wish I had a picture of all three of us. I had about 2 minutes with Mitch and Noel alone and just us off to the side. I'm sure Douglas and some other Hendrix people were there too but I didn't recognize them. I did get a polaroid with Noel who sensed my nervousness and pulled me in next to him saying, "I don't have aids, you can stand closer" or something. I also took photos of the band playing.

I guess if you are like Mitch the public just becomes a blur of people constantly trying to talk to you. Mitch's drumming complimented Jimi.


.

Fenders Fingers
06-14-11, 04:01 PM
Jimi's murder ........................ so you say.





My one and only experience with Mitch was climbing the grandstand behind his drum kit at the Delaware horse track in 1987 with "Axis" and a pen and trying to get him to sign an autograph. Kinda dumb, but I thought it was my only chance in my life to meet Mitch. He proceeded to tell me to "Piss Off!" - which, come to think of it, I probably would have said too in the same circumstances. I humbly withdrew. I suppose Mitch was the one mumbling "Asshole" as I left lol. I later met him in the club house and he was friendly enough and signed my album along with Noel. Damn! I wish I had a picture of all three of us. I had about 2 minutes with Mitch and Noel alone and just us off to the side. I'm sure Douglas and some other Hendrix people were there too but I didn't recognize them. I did get a polaroid with Noel who sensed my nervousness and pulled me in next to him saying, "I don't have aids, you can stand closer" or something. I also took photos of the band playing.

I guess if you are like Mitch the public just becomes a blur of people constantly trying to talk to you. Mitch's drumming complimented Jimi.

Like the STORY SD.

Scrum Drum
06-14-11, 04:03 PM
Wait...what?


I'm trying to stay away from that because it is secondary. Right now it is just important to prove Jimi was murdered. I've done a little reading on intel assassination. Read British barrister Fenton Bresler's book 'Who Killed John Lennon' to see that there was evidence Mark David Chapman was handled by spooks prior to shooting Lennon as a crazy lone nut. Sirhan Sirhan told the court he killed Bobby Kennedy because he was going to sell jets to Israel. The problem with that is Kennedy hadn't announced his intention to do so until several days after Sirhan was recorded entering "RFK MUST DIE!" over and over again in his diary. A sign of hypnotic programming. This shows Sirhan had a strong determination to kill RFK days before the claimed reason. Experts said both Sirhan and Chapman showed signs of hypnotic programming. Intel was killing political targets with hypnotized robots.

If you look at Monika she has a weird background and history with Jimi. She had only dated black musicians in Germany, which makes me wonder if she was being groomed for Hendrix? When she met Jimi they both had the same green jade stone in their jewelry. As soon as Jimi saw that he went into his "We were destined for each other rap". You can't argue that Monika didn't show strange signs of mental disturbance. I'm not sure of this one so I want to separate it from the murder evidence. However this kind of "Honey Trap" was a classic method they were using for espionage murders at the time. She might have been used to deliver super-strong sleeping tablets into Jimi's environment in a pre-planned black operation.

Fenders Fingers
06-14-11, 04:08 PM
"Right now it is just important to prove Jimi was murdered."

Having made up your mind SD, do you expect us to buy into you researched outcome?

Oh yeah, about those MP3's you mention earlier .................................. don't bother :-)

MourningStar
06-14-11, 05:03 PM
SD, I gotta admire your tenacity.

Nevermind all the 'friction'.

You go for it dude!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/mohawk.gif

jhendrixfanatic
06-14-11, 05:14 PM
SD, it sounds like you are familiar with Alex Jones, yes?

kdion11
06-14-11, 06:35 PM
I'm trying to stay away from that because it is secondary. Right now it is just important to prove Jimi was murdered. I've done a little reading on intel assassination. Read British barrister Fenton Bresler's book 'Who Killed John Lennon' to see that there was evidence Mark David Chapman was handled by spooks prior to shooting Lennon as a crazy lone nut. Sirhan Sirhan told the court he killed Bobby Kennedy because he was going to sell jets to Israel. The problem with that is Kennedy hadn't announced his intention to do so until several days after Sirhan was recorded entering "RFK MUST DIE!" over and over again in his diary. A sign of hypnotic programming. This shows Sirhan had a strong determination to kill RFK days before the claimed reason. Experts said both Sirhan and Chapman showed signs of hypnotic programming. Intel was killing political targets with hypnotized robots. .

KD: Or maybe they were just all nuts ? Just because they're crazy doesn't mean that they were crazy PROGRAMMED CIA
KILLERS now does it ? To me it just proves they were nuts

dino77
06-15-11, 02:08 AM
When she met Jimi they both had the same green jade stone in their jewelry. As soon as Jimi saw that he went into his "We were destined for each other rap".

He liked to get layed :bang:.

MourningStar
06-15-11, 12:24 PM
He liked to get layed :bang:.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/thumbs-up.gif

Scrum Drum
06-15-11, 03:46 PM
I would like to read these, are these official documents posted anywhere for public viewing?


I spent 20 minutes looking for this in Electric Gypsy, but it was in Henderson's 'Scuse Me While I Kiss The Sky' instead. I'm sure the Inquest records are kept somewhere in full form. Henderson covers it starting at page 3.

Stickells basically lied when he said he had no idea Jimi was at the Samarkand and first went to the Cumberland instead. I believe Stickells was fully aware of the Samarkand but went to the Cumberland first just to pick-up Slater. As I wrote before Jimi went over to visit Billy Cox when he was recovering over at Stickells flat. I doubt Jimi failed to mention he had walked the two blocks over from the Samarkand to get there. But we already know Slater admitted being at the Samarkand earlier that evening. Both Slater's shutting-up about this and Stickells' trying to make an alibi about his knowledge of the Samarkand shows they were trying to hide something. What Stickells is asking us to believe is that Jimi was dying in front of Burdon, causing him to call Stickells for help, and Burdon then neglected to tell Stickells where Jimi was. What you are looking at here is not an attempt to cover-up involvement in an accidental OD. This was obviously the pattern of people trying to cover-up a murder. Otherwise they wouldn't have stayed quiet so long. It is most important to realize they all knew Jimi was dead when they arrived. That is why it is important to pay attention to Henderson when he says they must have heard a different tale from Monika, when they first arrived, than what they told the Inquest.

trampledunderfoot
06-15-11, 05:48 PM
I'm trying to stay away from that because it is secondary. Right now it is just important to prove Jimi was murdered. I've done a little reading on intel assassination. Read British barrister Fenton Bresler's book 'Who Killed John Lennon' to see that there was evidence Mark David Chapman was handled by spooks prior to shooting Lennon as a crazy lone nut. Sirhan Sirhan told the court he killed Bobby Kennedy because he was going to sell jets to Israel. The problem with that is Kennedy hadn't announced his intention to do so until several days after Sirhan was recorded entering "RFK MUST DIE!" over and over again in his diary. A sign of hypnotic programming. This shows Sirhan had a strong determination to kill RFK days before the claimed reason. Experts said both Sirhan and Chapman showed signs of hypnotic programming. Intel was killing political targets with hypnotized robots.

If you look at Monika she has a weird background and history with Jimi. She had only dated black musicians in Germany, which makes me wonder if she was being groomed for Hendrix? When she met Jimi they both had the same green jade stone in their jewelry. As soon as Jimi saw that he went into his "We were destined for each other rap". You can't argue that Monika didn't show strange signs of mental disturbance. I'm not sure of this one so I want to separate it from the murder evidence. However this kind of "Honey Trap" was a classic method they were using for espionage murders at the time. She might have been used to deliver super-strong sleeping tablets into Jimi's environment in a pre-planned black operation.

You'd think Mark David Chapman might have mentioned that sometime over the past thirty years, then...

Which "experts"? I've only ever seen/heard conspiracy theorists say such things.

kdion11
06-15-11, 06:03 PM
Well, then 'providence' has accomplished your quest for justice when Jeffery perished in a most horrific manner a few years after murdering Hendrix. Based on this, your cause célèbre appears superflous to me.

KD: I still want to know why Kathy E hasn't had her damn head blown off yet !

MourningStar
06-15-11, 06:08 PM
KD: I still want to know why Kathy E hasn't had her damn head blown off yet !your answer has already been posted - review the topics.

Hendrix.
06-16-11, 12:05 PM
I was at a party one nite,a good few years ago,smoked some hash,had a few drinks,maybe too many if truth be told.
Turned pale and a lay down,i tried turning my head the other way,i vomited,struggled with getting it out,and a mate saw what was happening,i think this happened to JIMI,a total accident but there was nobody there to help him when he needed it.

Scrum Drum
06-16-11, 12:58 PM
You'd think Mark David Chapman might have mentioned that sometime over the past thirty years, then...



CNN's Larry King went to Attica Prison and asked Chapman what he thought about these theories and he said they were "hogwash". However experts said the process is capable of inducing the subject to forget his programming. Government is well documented in conducting these programs and it wasn't due to lack of trying that is for sure.




Which "experts"? I've only ever seen/heard conspiracy theorists say such things.


Dr Herbert Spiegel, the US's top expert on hypnosis at Columbia University. The police officer who watched Chapman that night in custody said he appeared to be programmed. Spiegel filed a formal request with the Attica warden to examine Chapman. He was denied.

It's kind of off-topic to this thread, however Bresler found problems with Chapman's airline ticket. The ticket in evidence was one that was impossible for United Airlines to have issued. The NY DA had Honolulu police captain Souza investigate the Hawaiian end. Souza went to the United ticket counter at Honolulu Airport and confirmed Chapman left on Dec 2nd. The ticket in evidence was for a Dec 5th departure and only for a Hawaii-Chicago round-trip. Yet the baggage claim ticket the NY DA had in evidence showed a Hawaii-Chicago-New York route. It was impossible by United's ticketing practices for Chapman to possess a baggage claim ticket for a flying route he didn't have a ticket for. Bresler found a Honolulu newspaper article from Dec 10 quoting Chapman's wife Gloria Abe saying "Mark left 8-10 days ago". 8 days prior was the 2nd - the same day confirmed by the United ticket counter. Ms Abe was a travel agent. It's unlikely she would have mistaken 5 days prior for 8. When Bresler went to Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Sullivan's office to check this out they told him their transportation file for Chapman was strangely missing. Bresler thinks it must have contained records showing a Dec 2nd departure as Souza confirmed.

Another interesting thing Bresler discovered is Chapman suddenly showed interest in 'Catcher In The Rye' in Aug 1980 right in perfect synch with Lennon's decision to resume his career. The problem with this was a disaffected apartment house maintenance worker Chapman, located in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, had no way of knowing this. After 'Catcher' incited Chapman's contempt for "phonies" the next book that was slipped under his eyes was Fawcett's 'One Day At A Time' - which accented Lennon's lavish lifestyle at the Dakota. The timing was perfect to incite Chapman to kill Lennon, only Lennon hadn't announced his intentions to anyone in August. FBI had been bugging Lennon's Dakota apartment since the Nixon years. Only persons with an ear into Lennon's private domain would have known his intentions to resume his career. Staunch Republican Ronald Reagan was also making plans...

trampledunderfoot
06-16-11, 01:53 PM
Hmm. How convenient that their "programming" can make you "forget" it happened...

I can't answer the ticket thing...but here's a simple answer for the overlap in time of Chapman's interest in Catcher in the Rye and Lennon's decision: Coincidence!

Anyway...this thread is about Jimi, so, let's get back to his death and the myriad of agencies involved in it.

MourningStar
06-16-11, 03:08 PM
Hmm. How convenient that their "programming" can make you "forget" it happened...it's only logical. makes for a great 'diminished capacity' or 'innocent by reason of mental defect' plea.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

MourningStar
06-16-11, 04:34 PM
... So, saying that, where the fuck was Monika when this was really happening? ...down the street buying a pack of smokes.

MourningStar
06-16-11, 04:43 PM
Right. And if that's true, how long did that take??long enough, ... apparently.

stplsd
06-16-11, 05:15 PM
I agree. In the 1970's and among other forms of "artificial stimulation", Methaqualone aka Quaaludes (Rorer 714) were the "thing" for some. In one rare situation while under the influence of one such pill.

One! not too many stopped at one. Well me too actually (lightweight), a couple of times, one, I think maybe a half, can't remember, without alcohol, was the buzz, you would feel the 'eelectricity' and the sexy, graceful feeling (althouh actually clumsy as feck, bull-in-a-china-shop, the only guaranteed aphrodisiac for women (Ian Dury: "I slipped her a Mandy, she didn't half go bandy"). Any more and you/she would just feel "numb" progressively so with the amount, alcohol in combination would hugely accelerate the numpty. It is also a very strong pain killer. Once I took two on top of alcohol and managed to knacker my shoulder quite badly stage diving (Hyde Park) before it was fashionable and people held you up, most of the hippies were sitting down as was their bent in those days ha-ha-ha. Not that I noticed I was injured too much at the time (feel no pain, but why is my arm not working properly??). Never went to hospital till next day, duh.
'Mandy' mates would end up taking five or more and get totally, slavering, zombied, nod out. I remember one attempting to drag by an arm his prone, semi-conscious girlfriend up the stairs in a pub, before we noticed and stepped in. Same guy I met by chance coming off a ferry (I was there to pick up some guys from the band) dragging his, again, prone, semi-conscious (male) friend by the arm, recognizing me he offered me some from a handfull of semi dissolved Mandies that he pulled out of his pocket, it was raining at the time and they were both soaked. I found them a tent to shelter in, but which they shortly afterward managed to set on fire. Ha-ha-ha

kdion11
06-16-11, 05:40 PM
Hmm. How convenient that their "programming" can make you "forget" it happened...
.

KD: Hey TUF. There you go ! That's proof that he was a CIA programmed assassin ! What a crock. Just like the lack of
any proof on this INTEL HIT SQUAD murder of Jimi proves that it's true and points to the highest echelon of UK Government
complicity and involvement. What a bunch of crap.

kdion11
06-16-11, 05:43 PM
Originally Posted by kdion11 http://crosstowntorrents.org/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?p=54564#post54564)
KD: I still want to know why Kathy E hasn't had her damn head blown off yet !


your answer has already been posted - review the topics.

KD: Huh ? If there was any proof to this claptrap then Kathy would have had her damn head blown off.
Earth to conspiracy theory mongers: She's still out there and has NOT had her damn head blown off yet.
Does that prove this is nothing but a crock ? I say yes !

kdion11
06-16-11, 05:45 PM
it's only logical. makes for a great 'diminished capacity' or 'innocent by reason of mental defect' plea.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

KD: Which was exactly what DIDN'T HAPPEN. Chappen was not allowed an "innocent by reason of mental incapacity"
plea and was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison which is where this moron will stay for the rest of his life.
Good riddence !

purple jim
06-16-11, 05:48 PM
If it was true, Eric Burdon would be 6 feet under by now (and Gerry Stickels and...). No sorry, they've all been programmed to forget.

MourningStar
06-16-11, 06:07 PM
If it was true, Eric Burdon would be 6 feet under by now (and Gerry Stickels and...). No sorry, they've all been programmed to forget.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/thumbs-up.gif

jhendrixfanatic
06-16-11, 07:11 PM
The "Monika poured the wine into him to try to clear his throat" scenario just doesn't flush.

nice pun

stplsd
06-16-11, 07:12 PM
Seems reasonable,

BUT,

how did all that wine get into Jimi's stomach and lungs AFTER he was already dead (according to the BAC)?

The "Monika poured the wine into him to try to clear his throat" scenario just doesn't flush. Nobody is THAT stupid.

The lack of serious governmental investigation suggests they may have been co-operating by doing nothing.

Who dun it?

Ain't No Tellin'.

Why not try reading the many posts that have popped the bubble of this BS, educate yourself instead of just being a passive victim?

Hendrix.
06-19-11, 09:22 AM
If truth be told,Jimi's death will be a conspiracy theorist's snare for years to come,it will be like 9/11,who killed J.F.K. and so forth.

I doubt if we'll ever get to the bottom of it all,i hope we do,but i can't see it ever happening.

MourningStar
06-19-11, 02:47 PM
I doubt if we'll ever get to the bottom of it all,i hope we do,but i can't see it ever happening.As long as the truth remains a mystery, the conspiricists will forever have fodder for their cannons.

Live with it peoples!

peace1

ilovejimi
06-19-11, 04:29 PM
I think its clear on how he died-- its the events that lead up to that point that will be the debate until the end of time. Of course once in the next world providing you're not late- you can ask the master himself-- thats right, our hero Mr. James Marshall Hendrix. Hmmm, however maybe at that point- that info will be moot to you as it will be to Jimi- he will be more interested in having you (as you will be) sitting front and center listening to an incredible concet performance by the man with the guitar (Jimi), as he welcomes you to the heavens.

Herman Cherusken
06-19-11, 04:55 PM
Damn how interesting it will be passing over to the other side, as I can't remember how it was last time around. And wonder what I will be next time coming down again...

MourningStar
06-19-11, 05:01 PM
I think its clear on how he died--....I don't think it is clear how he died. Why put 'open verdict' on the death certificate?

ilovejimi
06-19-11, 05:23 PM
manner of death is inhalation of vomit due to barbituate intoxication (how he died). Open verdict deals with insufficient evidence of circumstance as to how his death came to be (hence all of our speculation and theories) :rasta:.

ilovejimi
06-19-11, 06:04 PM
http://i383.photobucket.com/albums/oo279/detroitlionssuck/jimi_death_certf.gif

MourningStar
06-19-11, 06:13 PM
manner of death is inhalation of vomit due to barbituate intoxication (how he died). ...The 'spirit' of the topic, hence the poll, is how he died (well, actually, how you believe he died) given the parameters of poll choices, not the technical aspects as to how Hendrix ceased to be a living soul. We all know that!

MourningStar
06-19-11, 09:38 PM
http://i383.photobucket.com/albums/oo279/detroitlionssuck/jimi_death_certf.gifis there a scan of this with a resolution that renders the smallest print readable? Please post so to include in our Hendrix Information database.

-thnx,

ilovejimi
06-19-11, 10:48 PM
^ nice work Who Knows

MourningStar
06-20-11, 01:11 AM
From the same thing in a book:

"This certificate ...."still, a scan with the fine print readable would be welcome. please post if found.

thnx,

stplsd
06-20-11, 03:24 AM
I don't think it is clear how he died. Why put 'open verdict' on the death certificate?

It's already been explained at length

stplsd
06-20-11, 03:26 AM
manner of death is inhalation of vomit due to barbituate intoxication (how he died). Open verdict deals with insufficient evidence of circumstance as to how his death came to be (hence all of our speculation and theories) :rasta:.

Open verdict is as explained by the the coroners testimony in the court. Any speculation based on the 'open' verdict is due to a misunderstanding of this.

MourningStar
06-20-11, 11:37 AM
I don't think it is clear how he died. Why put 'open verdict' on the death certificate?
It's already been explained at lengththe question was not addressed to you. Everybody knows your position on everything.

MourningStar
06-20-11, 11:40 AM
manner of death is inhalation of vomit due to barbituate intoxication (how he died). Open verdict deals with insufficient evidence of circumstance as to how his death came to be (hence all of our speculation and theories) :rasta:.
Open verdict is as explained by the the coroners testimony in the court. Any speculation based on the 'open' verdict is due to a misunderstanding of this.bs2

Scrum Drum
06-20-11, 12:58 PM
I agree. In the 1970's and among other forms of "artificial stimulation", Methaqualone aka Quaaludes (Rorer 714) were the "thing" for some. In one rare situation while under the influence of one such pill, I also had a decent amount of wine in my system.



Which means your analogy is now disqualified because your blood alcohol content would have shown a level of alcohol which would have triggered a vomiting response. Jimi didn't have that, which means you are comparing apples to oranges.




But, I totally agree that the reason Jimi vomited so profusely is because it was a death throe bodily reaction that is hard-wired into the nervous system. Violent vomiting will definitely spray all over the place if one cannot control themselves. So, saying that, where the fuck was Monika when this was really happening? That's the part that really gets me. Was she really out the door at that time? It's quite an episode to go through but it's not a silent scene either. She had to hear something at some point! Especially when one chokes or pukes in the manner that Jimi was said to have.



Good. Now you are starting to do the critical thinking necessary. Thank you!


I don't think you realize that when you agree Jimi's intense vomiting was that of a death throe reaction that it necessarily means the vomiting came after the drowning in wine that caused it.

You are starting to apply the critical thinking skills that are needed to understand how implausible the accidental death claim is. The Samarkand basement flat was small with only one bed. According to Monika's story she would have to be right there next to him the whole time. The only other explanation would be that she ducked-out into the garden to brood or into the bathroom or such. But she didn't use that as an excuse. The more you analyze Monika's story the less excuse she has for not witnessing this fatal vomiting or reacting to it. Deniers who float the suggestion Monika was panicked and didn't know what to do are offering imbecilic excuses. What your friends did with you is exactly what anyone would have done - including Monika with Jimi. This feeble-minded Monika panicking and standing by while Jimi profusely vomited and choked to death is simply unbelievable on its face. It's only murder deniers who try to enforce this silly tale in order to defend their denial. It's obvious Monika was either there and forced to watch (hence her transferring that to the ambulance men tilting Jimi's head back when he tried to vomit) or was asked to "go fetch some ciggies, would you love?" while the foul deed was done. The murder scene makes sense that Monika may have been forced to watch, and therefore knew Jimi was stone dead, and therefore explains why the body was never touched. Or why those who assisted never touched the body and took 5 hours to clean the flat.

Smart people would realize Scotland Yard possesses some of the best Sherlock Holmes investigative brains in human history. The fact they didn't touch this glaring, obvious evidence tells you all you need to know. The manner of Jimi's death was declared an "open verdict" because that was the best formal cheezy non-committal position the British Government could take legally. Scotland Yard then criminally lied in 1993 when it declared there was no new evidence. Clearly there was and Monika's story was proven to be false, therefore nullifying the Inquest's verdict.

trampledunderfoot
06-20-11, 01:04 PM
Oi, I'd watch who you're calling imbecilic. There was no wine.

Scrum Drum
06-20-11, 01:19 PM
how did all that wine get into Jimi's stomach and lungs AFTER he was already dead (according to the BAC)?


The forensics make that impossible. Both the ambulance men and Bannister spoke of a hard, dry plug of vomit blocking Jimi's windpipe. Since the wine was blocked-in behind this that means no wine could have been poured through it after Jimi was dead. You can't pour bottles of wine into someone's lungs past a hard plug of vomit blocking the windpipe. The wine obviously caused the death and the vomit then blocked it in - as witnessed.




The "Monika poured the wine into him to try to clear his throat" scenario just doesn't flush. Nobody is THAT stupid.



Thank you. If you just apply some simple common sense to this you'll see Monika's story is clearly absurd yet it wasn't challenged. Only people busy trying to apply a leprechaun land self-serving celebration ethic would ignore this.





The lack of serious governmental investigation suggests they may have been co-operating by doing nothing.

Who dun it?


Bingo! Classic intel tactics. They are still doing that even today. There's no excuse for not further investigating this evidence. Instead of questioning or further investigating Tappy Wright they set their defamation trolls after him like they did to Bannister.

Scrum Drum
06-20-11, 01:35 PM
Oi, I'd watch who you're calling imbecilic. There was no wine.


I think people are smart enough to see people denying the wine.

If there was no wine then why did Monika react to Sharon Lawrence's questioning about the wine with strained moans and whines? You can't fake that kind of reaction. Monika was obviously severely reacting to something that was a painful, emotional memory to her. No, denying the wine is just plain dishonest. It was witnessed by Bannister, called 'grotesque' by the ambulance men, and spoken of by Monika. You don't actually believe Monika's claim that she washed Jimi's face with wine, do you? Please, you're not suggesting an internet poster trying to deny the facts has more credibility than all this evidence?

Why would Monika moan and abruptly change the subject with Lawrence over something that didn't exist? Why would those road crew men and Burdon who witnessed this not chime in?

kdion11
06-20-11, 01:44 PM
manner of death is inhalation of vomit due to barbituate intoxication (how he died). Open verdict deals with insufficient evidence of circumstance as to how his death came to be (hence all of our speculation and theories) :rasta:.

KD: Bingo ! Same then as it is now. "Open Verdict" it is, and shall remain so. Again, if anyone can come up with ANY REASON why the UK Government would try and murder Jimi, or be somehow involved in a conspiracy to help cover up anyone else who was involved in Jimi's "murder" we'd all love to hear it.

There is absolutely NO reason why the UK Government would be involved in any of this.

Nice try though !

Rupe
06-20-11, 02:21 PM
I doubt if Edward Heath had even heard of Jimi!

Fenders Fingers
06-20-11, 03:39 PM
I doubt if Edward Heath had even heard of Jimi!

Just have to post this again :-)

Rupe, you are a gem my son :-)

Rupe
06-20-11, 04:23 PM
Thanks FF!

Don't know how clearly this will come out


8075

MourningStar
06-20-11, 04:33 PM
Don't know how clearly this will come out


8075I can read all the fine print - thnx Rupe!!!!!

stplsd
06-20-11, 04:54 PM
the question was not addressed to you.
Nevertheless my answer stands

stplsd
06-20-11, 04:57 PM
bs2

Running a wee flag up a pole is not an argument against the presented facts of the matter, ie the fact of the coroner's report and his statements in court that clearly explain it. (for those that aren't sure of the exact meaning due to it's brief nature and maybe think the cause of death may be "insufficient evidence of circumstances" or even "open verdict";-)

Scrum Drum
06-20-11, 05:39 PM
There is absolutely NO reason why the UK Government would be involved in any of this.

Nice try though !


This is just pure ignorance of how government's work. Especially during the Cold War. Smarter analyses would recognize what the anti-war, hippy, rock, youth movement of the 60's represented vs the more conservative traditional military leanings of governments. If you don't know how many things the British Government has not investigated fully you're just ignorant of modern history. Dr Kelly the weapon's inspector for one. Another is former Russian federal security agent Alexander Litvinyenko who was murdered in broad daylight by an intel method and not pursued to its fullest despite all the evidence. This level of analysis and discourse is so lacking that it should be seen as the reinforcer of the murder evidence it is. The real truth, that accurately observes the reality at the time, would know the Cold War was full-on and all sorts of international intrigue was going on including a new vicious edge in US Security's COINTELPRO program of which Jimi was on top of the list. It's silly to ignore this and pretend you're offering a valid position.

Monika's story was proven to be completely false. Why then is Scotland Yard sticking to it and not explaining it even now?

univibs
06-20-11, 06:23 PM
if all known facts would be told to a 6 year old boy, he would know to build up a story that probably would look like this: -
A Rock Star goes out of a party, a little bit high and maybe a little bit drunk, he goes with his female companion to her flat, mainly because his Guitar is still there and maybe it's too late to go back to his Hotel he decided to stay the night , the female companion got freak after an argument when she understand she's nothing but one night stand or two (the Rock star has a girl friend back home in N.Y)
so she take 9 strong sleeping peels and put it in a glass of wine, the Rock Star crashes down while she is sitting beside him and wait till he will be dead, maybe after few hours of waiting she see that he is still alive (maybe because he is so strong) , she freaks again of what she did and calls for help but not an Ambulance, she make a few phone calls to a few friends she knew,when they arrived he is still alive but in bad shape, she tells her story, that she was upset and she tried to kill him but she didn't really wanted to do this and that she is afraid of what will happen when he will wake up, because he will know she tried to kill him, her friends (stoned) got freak becuse that will make them criminals as well, during that time the Rock star start vomiting and cry for help, maybe one of her friends take a quick action and put his hand against the vomiting man's airways.. the vomit can't go out so it goes back to his lungs, after few minutes everything is over.
they make a short clean up and calls for an ambulance.
they even found a nice song maybe had been written a long time ago and fit well to the actual scenario ..
so after a short while they publish the song and present it as a suicide note, you know, just to make sure that if anyone have a little bit of doubt - now it clears the doubt.


just to make sure, everything of what I had written here, is nothing but my imagination.
for me it's the closest thing to what had happen, I'm sure it wasn't a suicide, no way, after that being said , if it wasn't a suicide then it was his time to go, and if it hadn't happen that way it might had happened in any other way.
it's not likely that Jimi's friends which were Monica's friends as well would do such a thing , after reading all books and articles during the years it came down to this conclusion.

kdion11
06-20-11, 06:32 PM
This is just pure ignorance of how government's work. Especially during the Cold War. Smarter analyses would recognize what the anti-war, hippy, rock, youth movement of the 60's represented vs the more conservative traditional military leanings of governments. If you don't know how many things the British Government has not investigated fully you're just ignorant of modern history. Dr Kelly the weapon's inspector for one. Another is former Russian federal security agent Alexander Litvinyenko who was murdered in broad daylight by an intel method and not pursued to its fullest despite all the evidence. This level of analysis and discourse is so lacking that it should be seen as the reinforcer of the murder evidence it is. The real truth, that accurately observes the reality at the time, would know the Cold War was full-on and all sorts of international intrigue was going on including a new vicious edge in US Security's COINTELPRO program of which Jimi was on top of the list. It's silly to ignore this and pretend you're offering a valid position.

Monika's story was proven to be completely false. Why then is Scotland Yard sticking to it and not explaining it even now?

KD: Don't call me ignorant. : earth to Scrum Drum ! the UK wasn't involved in the Vietnam War - just the USA. Why would the UK Government murder a black American rock star ? No reason what so ever. If they were in the business of murdering trouble making rock stars, they had enough of their own to start with - Mick Jagger, John Lennon, Pete Townsend, etc etc etc. Scotland Yard is not "sticking" to anything either . They didn't find anything, no proof, no evidence, no nothing to warrrant overturning the original finding - which is exactly what you have here. NADA. It will remain an OPEN VERDICT !

MourningStar
06-20-11, 10:21 PM
... the UK wasn't involved in the Vietnam War ...correct - 'officially', that is. And Air America was really just a passenger and cargo airline.

Scrum Drum
06-21-11, 01:09 PM
if all known facts would be told to a 6 year old boy, he would know to build up a story that probably would look like this: -
A Rock Star goes out of a party, a little bit high and maybe a little bit drunk, he goes with his female companion to her flat, mainly because his Guitar is still there and maybe it's too late to go back to his Hotel he decided to stay the night , the female companion got freak after an argument when she understand she's nothing but one night stand or two (the Rock star has a girl friend back home in N.Y)
so she take 9 strong sleeping peels and put it in a glass of wine, the Rock Star crashes down while she is sitting beside him and wait till he will be dead, maybe after few hours of waiting she see that he is still alive (maybe because he is so strong) , she freaks again of what she did and calls for help but not an Ambulance, she make a few phone calls to a few friends she knew,when they arrived he is still alive but in bad shape, she tells her story, that she was upset and she tried to kill him but she didn't really wanted to do this and that she is afraid of what will happen when he will wake up, because he will know she tried to kill him, her friends (stoned) got freak becuse that will make them criminals as well, during that time the Rock star start vomiting and cry for help, maybe one of her friends take a quick action and put his hand against the vomiting man's airways.. the vomit can't go out so it goes back to his lungs, after few minutes everything is over.
they make a short clean up and calls for an ambulance.
they even found a nice song maybe had been written a long time ago and fit well to the actual scenario ..
so after a short while they publish the song and present it as a suicide note, you know, just to make sure that if anyone have a little bit of doubt - now it clears the doubt.


just to make sure, everything of what I had written here, is nothing but my imagination.
for me it's the closest thing to what had happen, I'm sure it wasn't a suicide, no way, after that being said , if it wasn't a suicide then it was his time to go, and if it hadn't happen that way it might had happened in any other way.
it's not likely that Jimi's friends which were Monica's friends as well would do such a thing , after reading all books and articles during the years it came down to this conclusion.


This version makes sense only if you ignore all the other more researched factors. Jeffery had hired Devon to spy on Jimi so he may have done the same with Monika. There's too many serious possibilities this version ignores. Jimi might not have gone back to the Samarkand because of his guitar but because it was a place he thought was unknown to Jeffery whom he had just fired. Jeffery had made death threats against Jimi, if he ever fired him, in a staged kidnapping. Many fans like to play match-maker with their idol and minimize Monika, however Jimi may have been seriously using her as a means by which to escape Jeffery - at least in London anyway. Jimi kept his most precious thing, his black beauty guitar, with Monika ("I've still got my guitar"). His clothes and stuff at the Cumberland were replaceable and made it look like he was staying there.


You have to pay attention to facts when speculating. If a pill was found under the bed from a 10 pack of Vesparax it means they were most-likely taken while sitting on the bed. I'm not excluding the Monika giving Jimi a mickey theory. I guess it is possible. We'd have to study the bitterness of Vesparax before assuming that. It's also possible Jimi was told the pills were Tuinols since he was recorded telling his New York doctor there were some Tuinols there at the flat he could take for his insomnia. In any case, realize your mickey theory is negligent homicide, which is murder.

I personally think your theory that the road crew members came and sat by while Jimi choked to death is silly and childishly preposterous. Jimi was obviously dead when they arrived which is exactly why Eric Burdon is dithering on answering that directly. Jimi was dead because he was killed quickly when waterboarded to death by either Jeffery or the henchmen he sent. There was no "short clean-up". The real record confirms they took 5 hours to 'clean-up the flat'.

I think what is obvious here is Jimi fired Jeffery and Jeffery then carried-out his threat to kill Jimi if he ever fired him. Just as Tappy witnessed. What Monika is telling you by sticking to that story is that she was of the type of personality that would go along with it and not talk. Simple as that. Monika is telling us a lot with her obviously transparent attempts to say she tried to get Jimi to fall asleep naturally in her book Inner World. She tells us a lot about herself by doing that. What she's telling us is that she has an almost psychopathic grip on reality to try to get away with saying "I gave Jimi the pills," and "the mafia did it for sure," and "I tried to get Jimi to fall asleep naturally" all in the same place. Monika is obviously trying to cover-up something serious that has driven her to these desperate extremes. The ultimate culmination of which was her death.

If you're smart you'll realize that both Slater and Stickells showed signs of trying to deny knowledge of the Samarkand after Jimi's death. Monika was from Germany and unfamiliar with London. Most likely she contacted Jimi's office in London, or friends or crew, to arrange accommodations. Alvinia said Monika came to her to find Jimi in London. Alvinia said she had a weird sense that Monika somehow knew she was in touch with Jimi. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that Stickells' flat was only 2 blocks away because the Samarkand was probably within his knowledge and recommended. If Slater and Stickells knew about the Samarkand then Jeffery did too. THIS is why they are shutting-up. The Samarkand was a death trap set-up for Jimi by Jeffery. It was baited with some blonde German honey.

purple jim
06-21-11, 02:28 PM
Your fantasy theory falls to PIECES because of something blatantly obvious. If this was supposed to be some sort of highly intelligent, expertly orchestrated COINTELPRO/CAI/Jeffrey/MI5/Scotland Yard plot (I'm on the fucking floor, laughing) as you imply, then where was the sense in recruiting such a dithering, pathetic and unreliable half-wit like Monika Danneman for such a crucial role. Oh, you will say, that is what it's all about. They did that deliberately! Just like Bannister described the corpse as being "unusually tall", deliberately because he sensed that Scotland Yard might bump him off too! It's like a friggin' Carry On film. Adopts Kenneth William's voice "...'ere...Stop messin' about!".

MourningStar
06-21-11, 04:15 PM
Your fantasy theory falls to PIECES because of something blatantly obvious. If this was supposed to be some sort of highly intelligent, expertly orchestrated COINTELPRO/CAI/Jeffrey/MI5/Scotland Yard plot (I'm on the fucking floor, laughing) as you imply, then where was the sense in recruiting such a dithering, pathetic and unreliable half-wit like Monika Danneman for such a crucial role ....This only describes Monika AFTER the dirty deed, a 'performance' easily achieved. Afterall, how hard can it be to 'act' like, in your own words, "a dithering, pathetic and unreliable half-wit". Not much known of her prior afaik.

univibs
06-21-11, 05:09 PM
I personally think your theory that the road crew members came and sat by while Jimi choked to death is silly and childishly preposterous. Jimi was obviously dead when they arrived which is exactly why Eric Burdon is dithering on answering that directly. Jimi was dead because he was killed quickly when waterboarded to death by either Jeffery or the henchmen he sent. There was no "short clean-up". The real record confirms they took 5 hours to 'clean-up the flat'.


you ignored one thing - why did Eric B gave a statement to the press one day later saying it was a suicide ?
he wasn't a policeman nor a detective/corner, so how come he got up and said it was a suicide, waving an Hendix's Song nobody knows when was written and presented it as a suicide note ?
I think he got freaked so he used what ever he could hold.
and there wasn't any problem to find any of Jimi's songs, they had an access to Jimi's room at the great Cumberland Hotel.

I can't say nor I have any proof that song was written earlier (few days,months), but I don't find any time for Jimi to write that song that day, he was extremely busy that day and it's a long song to write and it needs a little piece of mind to write it.

don't ignore the tiny facts. the tiny facts will lead you to the big secret.

stplsd
06-21-11, 05:36 PM
Just have to post this again :-)

Rupe, you are a gem my son :-)

Feck! it was Heath, I'd forgotten, thanks Rupe. "Teddy Teeth" didn't really register on my dial particularly, till the 'Angry Brigade', the miner's strike, the three day week (an excellent idea!) "Wales";-) Greasy Truckers, Hawkwind's 'Silver Machine' as Tony Blackburn's record of the week on Radio one - totally bizarre, the John Cipollina tour with 'Man' etc. etc. etc.

kdion11
06-21-11, 06:44 PM
Your fantasy theory falls to PIECES because of something blatantly obvious. If this was supposed to be some sort of highly intelligent, expertly orchestrated COINTELPRO/CAI/Jeffrey/MI5/Scotland Yard plot (I'm on the fucking floor, laughing) as you imply, then where was the sense in recruiting such a dithering, pathetic and unreliable half-wit like Monika Danneman for such a crucial role.

KD: Bingo again PJ. I've brought this up on (many !) occasion here too. NO ONE remembers Monica being associated with Jimi ever. The only reason she's known at all is because he died in her apartment. To say that INTEL / Jeffery / The MOB / The CIA / ANYBODY ! used Monica as a "plant" to set up killing Jimi is either stupid or crazy or both. Nobody knew her as an associate or intimate of Jimi so how could any of these sinister organizations use her as the "honey trap" to set up Jimi's murder. What a crock ! Jeffery didn't know anything about her and he was out of the country (UK) at the time anyway.

kdion11
06-21-11, 06:50 PM
This version makes sense only if you ignore all the other more researched factors. Jeffery had hired Devon to spy on Jimi so he may have done the same with Monika. There's too many serious possibilities this version ignores. Jimi might not have gone back to the Samarkand because of his guitar but because it was a place he thought was unknown to Jeffery whom he had just fired. Jeffery had made death threats against Jimi, if he ever fired him, in a staged kidnapping. THIS is why they are shutting-up. The Samarkand was a death trap set-up for Jimi by Jeffery. It was baited with some blonde German honey.

KD: Stop it man, you're killing us ! How could Jeffery know anything about Monica ? She wasn't even known to be in Jimi's orbit. Jeffery didn't know anything about her and Jimi never fired Jeffery. You just won't stop making this crap up to fit your sinister conspiracy theories will you ?

Round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and r.......

MourningStar
06-21-11, 06:52 PM
KD: NO ONE remembers Monica being associated with Jimi ever. ... Nobody knew her as an associate or intimate of Jimi .....

kdion11
06-21-11, 06:54 PM
This only describes Monika AFTER the dirty deed, a 'performance' easily achieved. Afterall, how hard can it be to 'act' like, in your own words, "a dithering, pathetic and unreliable half-wit". Not much known of her prior afaik.

KD: Which is exactly our point. How could anyone "recruit" somebody to kill Jimi it that person was not known
to be an associate of them ? We rest our case. What a crock !

MourningStar
06-21-11, 07:16 PM
This only describes Monika AFTER the dirty deed, a 'performance' easily achieved. Afterall, how hard can it be to 'act' like, in your own words, "a dithering, pathetic and unreliable half-wit". Not much known of her prior afaik.

KD: Which is exactly our point. How could anyone "recruit" somebody to kill Jimi it that person was not known to be an associate of them ? We rest our case. What a crock !The post states 'Not much', it does not state 'nothing'. Post #186 clearly shows Hendrix, Mitchell, Redding and others in the same company as Monika.

Scrum Drum
06-22-11, 12:21 AM
Your fantasy theory falls to PIECES because of something blatantly obvious. If this was supposed to be some sort of highly intelligent, expertly orchestrated COINTELPRO/CAI/Jeffrey/MI5/Scotland Yard plot (I'm on the fucking floor, laughing) as you imply, then where was the sense in recruiting such a dithering, pathetic and unreliable half-wit like Monika Danneman for such a crucial role.


Funny they said the same thing about Lee Harvey Oswald. You're forgetting one thing, Monika completely got away with it. And it wasn't because of her shrewd ability.

Something's not right with Monika. She sells herself as a virginal teutonic maiden but we then find out she only dated black musicians in Germany. Was she being groomed for Hendrix, the ultimate target? You laugh too much in relation to the points you don't/can't answer.


.

Scrum Drum
06-22-11, 12:45 AM
you ignored one thing - why did Eric B gave a statement to the press one day later saying it was a suicide ?
he wasn't a policeman nor a detective/corner, so how come he got up and said it was a suicide, waving an Hendrix's Song nobody knows when was written and presented it as a suicide note ?
I think he got freaked so he used what ever he could hold.
and there wasn't any problem to find any of Jimi's songs, they had an access to Jimi's room at the great Cumberland Hotel.


This is where it gets mind-bending. Burdon had Jeffery as a manager for many years. He knew exactly what Jeffery was and his potential. Burdon had information on Jeffery that he might get killed over. He had seen how far Jeffery was willing to go with Jimi and knew first hand how dangerous he was. In my mind the reason Eric went on TV so soon after Jimi's death to claim he committed suicide was because he was trying to save his own ass. The forthright claim that Jimi committed suicide on British national television would send the message to Jeffery that his secret was safe with him. If Jimi's close friend said he had inside proof Jimi killed himself there therefore wouldn't be any need for Jeffery to shut-up Burdon the way he had Jimi. In a way I don't blame Burdon because if you think of it there was no serious investigation into Jimi's death and therefore Eric himself could be just as easily killed without any investigation either. He was freaked all right, and he had good reason to be.




I can't say nor I have any proof that song was written earlier (few days,months), but I don't find any time for Jimi to write that song that day, he was extremely busy that day and it's a long song to write and it needs a little piece of mind to write it.


Experts on Jimi's handwriting said the 'Story Of Life' poem was written in haste according to the handwriting pattern. Not everything Monika says is a lie. Jimi did have some hours of relaxation at the Samarkand on the 17th.




don't ignore the tiny facts. the tiny facts will lead you to the big secret.


Right. Something that was never done with Jimi's death. One thing is for sure, the "Bannister was looking for attention" method of inquiry certainly isn't valid. Bannister was never seeking attention on this. The record clearly states he was seeking to rectify accusations of malpractice as claimed by Monika.

Scrum Drum
06-22-11, 01:16 AM
KD: Stop it man, you're killing us ! How could Jeffery know anything about Monica ? She wasn't even known to be in Jimi's orbit. Jeffery didn't know anything about her and Jimi never fired Jeffery. You just won't stop making this crap up to fit your sinister conspiracy theories will you ?


You need to read more about intel and their methods. There is a scenario possible here where intel came to Jeffery and told him your client Hendrix is threatening our covert banks. Jeffery had to hang on to Jimi because he had established a management relationship that was based on feeding funds into those black ops bank accounts. You have to understand those shady intel/mafia people don't ask permission they just take money where they can get it - especially the mob. You have no idea how seriously powerful those banks were and what strategic purpose they embodied in the Cold War. They were literally CIA's most sensitive covert funding source. There's no question what so ever they would kill to protect them. You have no idea of the powers we are talking about here and what was threatened. The reason friends say Jeffery could never kill Jimi is because they don't understand the serious players that were above Jeffery and putting pressure on him.

In relation to this you have no idea how easily intel's known methods would fit into Monika's relationship to Jimi. Jimi was on some serious intel security lists, in this case Jeffery would not even need to be involved. This could have happened completely independently of Jeffery. If you understood the intel universe and its capabilities you would realize how foolish your questions are.




Jimi never fired Jeffery



No, sure. And he never wore a crucifix that night at the Samarkand, even though he never did that before. And he never wrote a poem that was interpreted as expecting death soon. And he never spoke to Monika of his inner world and coming back to her on the astral plane if he was somehow unable to do so physically. And he never sought a flat that Jeffery wouldn't know about with Debbie Toomey or even Monika. Not to mention Jimi sitting Monika down next to the phone in order to have her witness him firing Jeffery. Nor did Jeffery ever threaten to kill Jimi if he fired him. Sure...

stplsd
06-22-11, 04:29 AM
And he never spoke to Monika of his inner world and coming back to her on the astral plane if he was somehow unable to do so physically. And he never sought a flat that Jeffery wouldn't know about with Debbie Toomey or even Monika. Not to mention Jimi sitting Monika down next to the phone in order to have her witness him firing Jeffery. Nor did Jeffery ever threaten to kill Jimi if he fired him. Sure...

You want to have your cake and eat it. One minute she's a complete liar, next your basing your story on what she says!
One minute she's luring him back to her flat. Next it's Jimi that sought out her flat as a hideaway!
And as for Debbie Toomey, you don't even know who she is, or anything about her.
Who was it said Jeffery threatened to kill him?

stplsd
06-22-11, 04:38 AM
Bannister was never seeking attention on this. The record clearly states he was seeking to rectify accusations of malpractice as claimed by Monika.

I wouldn't choose the word "rectify" how about "totally fabicate a story about loads of red wine. In a pathetic attempt to cover his own ass". Because the medical tribunal was about to reach it's verdict on several accusations of malpractice against him (two of which were found proven) and the fraud which would end his medical career.


Experts on Jimi's handwriting said the 'Story Of Life' poem was written in haste according to the handwriting pattern.

Source?

Fenders Fingers
06-22-11, 09:23 AM
...................................

No offense of course. Obviously, I am being somewhat evasive to your direct posting, but for heavens sake friend, say something off the subject just once and I promise to either burn one with you or perhaps share a pint. How about it? You down?....I'll even throw in a free, unseen concert photo.

If talking crap gets me an unseen concert pic, well I can do that lol. Send away ........................... :-)
Asking SC for anything other than his views on what he has read so far has fallen on deaf ears.
Ho Hum.

kdion11
06-22-11, 05:55 PM
You need to read more about intel and their methods. There is a scenario possible here where intel came to Jeffery and told him your client Hendrix is threatening our covert banks. In relation to this you have no idea how easily intel's known methods would fit into Monika's relationship to Jimi. Jimi was on some serious intel security lists, in this case Jeffery would not even need to be involved. This could have happened completely independently of Jeffery. If you understood the intel universe and its capabilities you would realize how foolish your questions are.

KD: And Jimi never fired Jeffery.

No, sure. And he never wore a crucifix that night at the Samarkand, even though he never did that before. And he never wrote a poem that was interpreted as expecting death soon. And he never spoke to Monika of his inner world and coming back to her on the astral plane if he was somehow unable to do so physically. And he never sought a flat that Jeffery wouldn't know about with Debbie Toomey or even Monika. Not to mention Jimi sitting Monika down next to the phone in order to have her witness him firing Jeffery. Nor did Jeffery ever threaten to kill Jimi if he fired him. Sure...

KD: Dude, come on. I don't need to read anything about INTEL - I've heard enough ! Now all your proof and evidence has been changed to a "possible scenario" ? That's all I need to see and what I've been saying all along. You have no proof, no evidence no nothing - just theories and possible scenarios. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but you are making a big time
stretch here. Most of us have open minds here (hey we're Jimi Hendrix followers !) but the more intelligent and "experienced" members require a little proof - especially on a topic as serious as Jimi's death.

As far as "Monica's relationship with Jimi" goes - she didn't have one ! That's why all of this is such a crock. Jeffery, The CIA, The UK Government or anyone wanting to "get Jimi" wouldn't have used Monica to get to Jimi, because she had no known history with him !

Next: Jimi "never wrote a poem about expecting death soon" ? How about the last verse in Voodoo Chile Slight Return ? Which of course is debatebly Jimi's most famous song ? !!!!

"I'll meet you in the next world and don't be late" !

kdion11
06-22-11, 06:18 PM
The post states 'Not much', it does not state 'nothing'. Post #186 clearly shows Hendrix, Mitchell, Redding and others in the same company as Monika.

KD: "Not much" is "not much" That's for sure. A one time photo of a "fan" at a table in Munich / Dusseldorf, wherever
it was, seated with a dozen others ? That's the "key person inside the Hendrix Camp" contact INTEL was going to use to get to murder Jimi 18 months later ?

Stop it you guys, you're killing us !

MourningStar
06-22-11, 07:03 PM
A one time photo of a "fan" ...how about another ...

Scrum Drum
06-22-11, 07:11 PM
"Critical thinking skills", "smart people", "deniers" = "blah, blah, woof, woof !!"
Holy moly, please dude....don't come off like a longtime, top-notch detective especially when your own skills are said to be based on a selected group of book writers (yikes!)... or he said, she said nonsense. Your theories aren't teaching or educating (this particular CTT member) anything new. So, I really suggest that you make some personal contact with those directly involved before anything else. But I most warn you... the very few that are still around aren't so open about the subject anymore nor do they want to relive that particular scene. Jeez...did I even have to say that?

My view is that they are good points based on sound logic. I haven't seen anything to show otherwise. I agree contacting and further interviewing those who were closest to the event is a good idea, but I think there's enough good evidence to at least show Jimi didn't die the way that was officially claimed.



"Additionally and quite honestly? Your current and obvious obsession is much more questionable in comparison to the mystery surrounding Jimi's death. You seem like a fanatically obsessed-one subject only-programmed-robotic-loop. Saying that, are you even capable of posting something differently about Jimi?? Anything? Something really tells me you only listened to 'Suddenly November Morning' what, twice?


I've seen the "obsessed" claim before. It comes after people make dumb points that force you to make strict arguments, which in turn draws the psychological defense mechanism of calling my efforts "obsession". The way I look at it is that people are irresponsibly complacent about what happened to Jimi and its significance. By calling someone obsessed it suggests people who are more relaxed with the evidence are normal and people who force the points are driven by an abnormal psychological drive. There's a simple formula here: You either care enough about Jimi to do justice for him or you don't. People who suggest you need to not care about what happened to Jimi in order to conform to Hendrix fan-dom give me a much more uncomfortable feeling than you feel here. It's kind of morally depraved to not realize the reason this was never done up til now is exactly because this prevailing complacency ruled and prevented anyone from doing so. And trying to reduce someone's Hendrix status because they don't accept fan indifference to his murder is *******. It's funny how people who can't answer good arguments trend towards ad hominem. Respectfully - answer the points.



"Trust me, I can get into some very deep shit on the subject especially since I already had the very unique opportunity to meet enough of the cast & I'm NOT bragging about that, I'm 100% thankful. They all offered me a variety of views or reasoning which, obviously, amounted to no definite conclusion. I should also add that it wasn't even the topic of choice. It was almost inappropriate to bring the subject up in person unless a genuine relationship of some sort was developed. Guys like Mitch would practically spit on you. Anyway, I prefer to get off on Jimi's sounds and/or visions and nothing less. Anything else leaves me limp.


There's some Hendrix fans who think they're cool by being indifferent to his murder. Personally I think those people are just breezy people pretending to be hip. What this all comes down to is Jimi was murdered in real time, hard ground reality. That is something that most of the people surrounding him were trying to escape at the time. The way the system works is all the venues that guard real time reality are overseen by the government. Since the people surrounding Jimi were not proactive government interface personalities they might not have been the first choice of those who should have conducted this. So as close as they were they might not be the best reference group as far as evidence for his murder. Etchingham did make the first moves but it seems to me that her agenda was trying to clear her reputation in relation to Hendrix and not really fighting for the truth over what happened. In the end, no matter how close people were to Jimi their value is only as good as how well they are able to answer the evidence. If Mitch would spit on people for that, well then he had bad manners, not to mention a bad sense of the gravity of this. You need obsessed people on this, otherwise you're going to get the same non-results of the past 40 years.




"No offense of course. Obviously, I am being somewhat evasive to your direct posting, but for heavens sake friend, say something off the subject just once and I promise to either burn one with you or perhaps share a pint. How about it? You down?....I'll even throw in a free, unseen concert photo.


Yeah, sure. I always welcome any Jimi stuff. I'm equally as obsessed with his music and memorabilia etc. Forgive me though if I just can't accept that offer if it comes at the expense of not caring. If proving Hendrix's murder meant I drew the scorn and contempt of every single Hendrix fan I wouldn't give a damn. It's a silly issue, really, and I shouldn't have to argue so much.

trampledunderfoot
06-22-11, 07:13 PM
He wasn't murdered. There is no credible evidence to suggest that.

ilovejimi
06-22-11, 08:48 PM
I bet the insurance company made sure everything was investigated as much as possible; what insurance co would willingly just cough up all that life insurance money. They were convienced it was not murder or suicide.

I looked into Jeffery having a personal life insurance policy on Jimi (HE DID NOT) rather it was Warner Brothers that held the policy ( M J signature is on it) but he was not paid any insurance monies.

No where on the death cert does it state he aspirated from WINE..

Maybe his death is just really really simple-- he wanted to get some sleep- he took too many sleeping pills by accident where it shut down his system- he vomited and sufficated and died.

MourningStar
06-22-11, 09:38 PM
Maybe his death is just really really simple-- he wanted to get some sleep- he took too many sleeping pills by accident where it shut down his system- he vomited and sufficated and died.Maybe.

Hendrix, at the time of his death, was Rock Star Number One and was in all likelihood going to remain as such for quite some time. Now, if I were MJ, being in the ideal position, and watching this phenomenal transition, I would have done all in my power to insure that no harm come to this gold-egg laying goose. And with the 'connections' and 'baggage' that is being attached to MJ (even without it too), it would have been the easiest thing and in his best interest to assign a couple of goons er, uh, I mean body-guards 24/7. Short of suicide or act of God (run over by a lorrie, plane crash, etc.), of all people, MJ was in the best position to PREVENT the death of Hendrix, not cause it. In this light, I find him guilty of negligent homicide.

ilovejimi
06-22-11, 09:59 PM
Ceasar Glebeck will solve this for us once and for all-- his Univibes Mag on the death of Jimi is coming out this Septemtber:

Newsflash!
Coming up in 2011 this new publication (A4):
Until We Meet Again:
The Last Weeks of Jimi Hendrix
Finally: the truth about Jimi's last weeks on Earth.
We will de-myth all the nonsense that's been around for 4 decades by "experts" and/or self-appointed part-time amateur "sleuths":
* Jimi mixed sleeping pills with alcohol? Nope!
* Jimi was covered in "red wine" when he arrived at the hospital: Nope!
* Jmi died in the Samarkand flat: Nope!
* Jimi was dead "for hours" before he arrived at the hospital: Nope!
* Jimi was "murdered by his manager": Nope!
* Etc.

ilovejimi
06-22-11, 10:03 PM
^If he is going with the theory that red wine played no or little part in Jimi's death- im buying into said theory

ilovejimi
06-22-11, 10:21 PM
Jimi was dead "for hours" before he arrived at the hospital: Nope! (CG statement)

(my comment) When did folks start cleaning Monika's apartment?-- just after the ambulance was called or hours before hand?-- sounds grim having a dead body lying there whilst person or persons are running around cleaning the apartment of, perhaps drugs. On the other hand, maybe it only took a few minutes to clean the place. Too bad the police didnt do a better job of investigating- probally no police report is in existance.

Id like to hear more details regarding Scotland yard reopening the case in the 90's-- whom got interviewed and where are those documents?

Monika really screws things up with all her changing of details from interview to interview (how is it she says she was in the ambulance and the ambulance workers saying this is not true?

Wonder if she ever confided with the Scorpions singer (Ulrich Roth) about what really happened to Jimi. If i were CG I would look him up and try for an interview. I wonder if she ever kept a diary.

ilovejimi
06-22-11, 10:39 PM
* Jmi died in the Samarkand flat: Nope! (CG statment)

(my comment) WOW, so was he then alive when taken into the ambulance, perhaps even alive as he arrived at the hospital. Cant wait for Ceasar to clarify his statement- abulance workers from what Ive read state he was most certanly dead when they walked into the apartment. Id like to know where his facts are comming from espec since almost all the players are dead

MourningStar
06-22-11, 10:56 PM
(my comment) WOW, so was he then alive when taken into the ambulance, perhaps even alive as he arrived at the hospital. Cant wait for Ceasar to clarify his statement- abulance workers from what Ive read state he was most certanly dead when they walked into the apartment. Id like to know where his facts are comming from espec since almost all the players are deadsomeone stated earlier (here or in another thread) that the Hendrix corpse was dumped at the Samarkand.

ilovejimi
06-22-11, 11:10 PM
someone stated earlier (here or in another thread) that the Hendrix corpse was dumped at the Samarkand.

thank you

it seems the more i learn, the less i know

Ezy Rider
06-23-11, 04:00 AM
^ Or, as MD claimed in Electric Gypsy, that she was in the ambulance and that he suffocated in the ambulance because he was put upright by the brothers (the brothers say they never saw her and that he was dead at the Samarkand). This could also explain CG's other statement that Jimi wasn't dead for hours. This would mean that CG is simply elaborating upon his Electric Gypsy story. We will see

purple jim
06-23-11, 07:30 AM
Maybe his death is just really really simple-- he wanted to get some sleep- he took too many sleeping pills by accident where it shut down his system- he vomited and sufficated and died.

The musician Meic Stevens has just revealed that he met Jimi on the night of the 17th and watched as Jimi mixed red wine with his lager. Further into the night, after visiting friends and partying, drinking, Jimi must have been well sloshed. So adding barbiturates to this cocktail was lethal.

Scrum Drum
06-23-11, 12:54 PM
If people want to run a parallel conversation of speculation right besides the more than obvious facts they can do so but they do so at the expense of their own credibility.

I can't understand why people would want to ignore such obvious facts. Eric Burdon said he was called at the crack of dawn and maybe even earlier. Since Jimi was found covered in vomit and untouched that means nobody tried to help him. What people have to do is wake-up and realize what the state of Jimi's body is telling you is that when Monika first reacted and started reaching-out for help that Jimi was already dead. People who float other theories and speculate other possibilities in the face of this are just exposing their lack of understanding. It's simple common sense that Monika didn't wipe the vomit off Jimi and try to get him breathing because she knew he was dead. And the reason she knew he was dead was because she knew others had done something to Jimi. You'll see people speculate that Monika was dizzy and stood by in a panic while she watched Jimi vomit and choke to death - but that's as silly as it sounds and doesn't pass the common sense test. No one, including Monika, would stand by and watch Jimi Hendrix choke to death. Jimi was obviously dead when the clean-up crew got there. Otherwise people would be indirectly suggesting that Burdon and the road crew members cleaned the flat for 5 hours while Jimi lay there choking to death. Again, these people don't mind their credibility closely enough.

I'm sure Caesar is a good collector and Hendrix source however he's shown some serious lack of skill in pursuing the evidence behind Jimi's death. I don't know what his agenda is but you have to remember Caesar backed Monika's story up until he was forced off it.

Scrum Drum
06-23-11, 01:01 PM
someone stated earlier (here or in another thread) that the Hendrix corpse was dumped at the Samarkand.



Why bother to enter obviously false information?


There were many witnesses to Jimi leaving the party with Monika alive and well. The autopsy found only the chemicals of Vesparax in Jimi's system, therefore, since the Vesparax were located at the Samarkand, he got back there alive.

MourningStar
06-23-11, 01:12 PM
Why bother to enter obviously false information?
...was'sa matta wit you? you don't like my MJ guilty of 'negligent homicide' angle?

rolleyes1

Scrum Drum
06-23-11, 01:54 PM
I bet the insurance company made sure everything was investigated as much as possible; what insurance co would willingly just cough up all that life insurance money. They were convienced it was not murder or suicide.

I looked into Jeffery having a personal life insurance policy on Jimi (HE DID NOT) rather it was Warner Brothers that held the policy ( M J signature is on it) but he was not paid any insurance monies.

No where on the death cert does it state he aspirated from WINE..

Maybe his death is just really really simple-- he wanted to get some sleep- he took too many sleeping pills by accident where it shut down his system- he vomited and sufficated and died.


You're just not thinking this through, man. If everything was as ordinary and easily-explained as you suggest then we would have no problem finding the records for all this stuff. We could find the insurance company investigation report etc. You are using the right logic but coming to the wrong conclusion. Insurance companies deal with foul play on a daily basis. They would be the first people to ask the British inspector who said "they were all lying" what he thought. Or investigate Jeffery's motives. People are not using common sense. There's no insurance company in the world that would ignore all the obvious evidence in this case unless they were induced to do so by the powers that be. When you correctly understand Jimi's death was an intel political assassination the strange business with the insurance policy makes sense.

If Jeffery did not hold any personal policy then where did he get the large amounts of cash after Jimi's death? Also, Bob Levine and Chas both said Jeffery had a policy (whether it was Warner Brother's or not). In any case it doesn't matter. Jeffery would still have an incentive to kill Jimi on several levels. One would be not having to pay Jimi the money he stole from him by cooking the books. The arguments being used here to deny the murder are so lacking in relevant information that they can't be used to credibly analyze the case.

Bannister removed the wine so they just generally referred to it as "vomit" (I think that's more than obvious).

It's hardly likely Monika would sit by next to Jimi from the hours of 3:10am to 5:15am and watch Jimi vomit and die. It's not like there haven't been confessions, or forensic evidence, or circumstantial signs of guilt etc.. Accepting the official story can only be done if you willfully ignore all the evidence of murder.

purple jim
06-23-11, 03:22 PM
Bannister removed the wine...

He removed the wine from the body of an "unusually tall man". So tall that his legs stuck out over the end of the table!
Hey, perhaps the hit-men stretched Jimi on a rack before they filled him with wine.

univibs
06-23-11, 06:25 PM
* Jmi died in the Samarkand flat: Nope! (CG statment)

(my comment) WOW, so was he then alive when taken into the ambulance, perhaps even alive as he arrived at the hospital. Cant wait for Ceasar to clarify his statement- abulance workers from what Ive read state he was most certanly dead when they walked into the apartment. Id like to know where his facts are comming from espec since almost all the players are dead

here we go again,
the two ambulance man said he was dead for some time.
the doctor at the hospital said he was tried everything he can just for the formality of it, I think I read it in Tony Brown's book.

kdion11
06-23-11, 06:47 PM
Jmi died in the Samarkand flat: Nope! (CG statment)

(my comment) WOW, so was he then alive when taken into the ambulance, perhaps even alive as he arrived at the hospital. Cant wait for Ceasar to clarify his statement- abulance workers from what Ive read state he was most certanly dead when they walked into the apartment. Id like to know where his facts are comming from espec since almost all the players are dead


here we go again,
the two ambulance man said he was dead for some time.
the doctor at the hospital said he was tried everything he can just for the formality of it, I think I read it in Tony Brown's book.

KD: Maybe what he's saying is that Jimi died somewhere else and his body was then moved to Monica's ! Yikes.
Recent reports of Jim Morrison's death that have surfaced aledge to have him OD'ing on smack in a toilet at a sleezy
Paris Rock Club called the Rock n Roll Circus and then having his body being dragged back to Pam's apartment and put it
a scalding hot bath to disguise the time of death. Chilling stuff............. Then again, it's probably all a crock because
we all know that both were murdered by INTEL HIT SQUADS ! Not !

kdion11
06-23-11, 06:49 PM
He removed the wine from the body of an "unusually tall man". So tall that his legs stuck out over the end of the table!
Hey, perhaps the hit-men stretched Jimi on a rack before they filled him with wine.

KD: Hilarious ! Good one PJ - yes we all know that INTEL Hit Squads have all kinds of access to a myriad of hideous
contraptions to peform their evil deeds !

kdion11
06-23-11, 06:55 PM
If people want to run a parallel conversation of speculation right besides the more than obvious facts they can do so but they do so at the expense of their own credibility.

I can't understand why people would want to ignore such obvious facts. Eric Burdon said he was called at the crack of dawn and maybe even earlier. Since Jimi was found covered in vomit and untouched that means nobody tried to help him. What people have to do is wake-up and realize what the state of Jimi's body is telling you is that when Monika first reacted and started reaching-out for help that Jimi was already dead. People who float other theories and speculate other possibilities in the face of this are just exposing their lack of understanding. It's simple common sense that Monika didn't wipe the vomit off Jimi and try to get him breathing because she knew he was dead. And the reason she knew he was dead was because she knew others had done something to Jimi. You'll see people speculate that Monika was dizzy and stood by in a panic while she watched Jimi vomit and choke to death - but that's as silly as it sounds and doesn't pass the common sense test. No one, including Monika, would stand by and watch Jimi Hendrix choke to death. Jimi was obviously dead when the clean-up crew got there. Otherwise people would be indirectly suggesting that Burdon and the road crew members cleaned the flat for 5 hours while Jimi lay there choking to death. Again, these people don't mind their credibility closely enough.

I'm sure Caesar is a good collector and Hendrix source however he's shown some serious lack of skill in pursuing the evidence behind Jimi's death. I don't know what his agenda is but you have to remember Caesar backed Monika's story up until he was forced off it.

KD: Yes, and the next "obvious" thread would be that anybody with half a brain (if this "theory" of yours has any chance of being correct) would call a press conference or contact the authorities immediately after Mike Jeffery's death in the plane crash to expose the truth of this "sinister" conspiracy. Why wouldn't she ? Who was going to "off her" if she did ?

To think that Monica held this "secret" for 26 years and then committed suicide rather than tell the truth is just completely
assinine

kdion11
06-23-11, 06:59 PM
The musician Meic Stevens has just revealed that he met Jimi on the night of the 17th and watched as Jimi mixed red wine with his lager. Further into the night, after visiting friends and partying, drinking, Jimi must have been well sloshed. So adding barbiturates to this cocktail was lethal.


Had Jimi been "well sloshed" the BAC would have confirmed that, which it didn't.

KD: Yep, the autopsy revealed a very low blood alcohol level. Next ! I just read this story of this clown -
he describes himself as "best friends with Jimi" . Yea, right. I've never heard of him.

purple jim
06-24-11, 02:49 AM
KD: Yep, the autopsy revealed a very low blood alcohol level.

That level represents what in terms of booze?

Horizon
06-24-11, 03:17 AM
KD: Yep, the autopsy revealed a very low blood alcohol level. Next ! I just read this story of this clown -
he describes himself as "best friends with Jimi" . Yea, right. I've never heard of him.
He's popular in Wales!

stplsd
06-24-11, 03:58 AM
That level represents what in terms of booze?

According to Tony Brown's transcript of the report, the pathologist said that the blood alcohol at time he took Vesparax was "probably" 100mg%. Possibly 3-4 pints of 5% beer, or bit over a bottle of wine? The UK DD limit is 80mg% .

purple jim
06-24-11, 06:18 AM
According to Tony Brown's transcript of the report, the pathologist said that the blood alcohol at time he took Vesparax was "probably" 100mg%. Possibly 3-4 pints of 5% beer, or bit over a bottle of wine? The UK DD limit is 80mg% .


When I drink that much I'm well sloshed (I'm not a six pint an evening kinda guy).
Well there you go. Jimi certainly drank enough to cause a bad mix with too many barbs.

ilovejimi
06-24-11, 09:20 AM
^ i agree; and with his modest weight-- that booze had to of had a negative effect. I now believe the pills and booze are exactly what put our hero over the edge.

Ezy Rider
06-24-11, 09:26 AM
But still, nine pills is still a lot, more like a handful, while our Vestal Virgin took a neat one (half?) pill according to prescription, meaning that they took it together, or should we understand that our hero chucked the whole tube/package in his throat because he was no longer sober with MD watching? Shit happens but this is very strange, smelly shit that happened.

stplsd
06-24-11, 10:44 AM
When I drink that much I'm well sloshed (I'm not a six pint an evening kinda guy). Well there you go. Jimi certainly drank enough to cause a bad mix with too many barbs.

That's just my inexpert rough guess. "Sloshed" in my book means very drunk - on three pints of average beer? or a bit over a pint of 12% wine, Surely not


^ i agree; and with his modest weight-- that booze had to of had a negative effect. I now believe the pills and booze are exactly what put our hero over the edge.

The renowned pathologist, and coroner disagree with you both, the alcohol was not seen as a significant factor in their expert, 1st hand analysis. Only the barbiturates which impeded his cough reflex when he vomited, causing him to choke to death.

Scrum Drum
06-24-11, 12:52 PM
According to Tony Brown's transcript of the report, the pathologist said that the blood alcohol at time he took Vesparax was "probably" 100mg%. Possibly 3-4 pints of 5% beer, or bit over a bottle of wine? The UK DD limit is 80mg% .



No matter how many times you tell deniers that Teare's 100mg estimate was based on Monika's timescale it gets ignored. The deniers in this thread have destroyed their own input, only they aren't aware of it. Teare made that estimate under the assumption that Jimi had imbibed the wine according to Monika's story and then ingested it from the period of consumption near 3:30am until he expired at 11:30am. I'm beginning to think that some people are basically incapable of processing forensic information. Dr Teare made the assumption that Jimi's body reduced a large amount of wine, starting at the 100mg level, down to the recorded 5mg/100ml over that 8 hour period.

Jimi was dead at at least 5:15am when Monika started reaching out. Therefore the forensic timescale involved is from 3:10am until 5:15am or earlier. Teare was not aware his forensic timescale was only about two hours which means it was anatomically impossible for Jimi's blood alcohol level to go from 100mg to 5mg as Teare surmised.

As one can see the non-believers in this thread allow themselves the privilege of not engaging the necessary forensic arguments involved. Once we narrow down that Jimi had a forensic golden hour from 3:10am to 5:15am we can then apply the forensic estimations for Vesparax behaviour in relation to this blood alcohol estimate. There's a basic formula that wasn't entered here. Jimi's barbiturate level was 3.9mgs percent of blood. But we don't know if that was a peak-out level from the estimated 9 tablet dose? If the peak-out level was much higher for that dose it would tell us Jimi was murdered well before the peak. That would also be a strong forensic indicator of the written in stone forensic absorption rates proving Jimi died well before the official estimates. The British Government refuses to touch this because they know it will irrefutably prove murder.

If you look at the deniers arguments they absolutely have to dismiss Bannister's witnessing because they know that once you admit the large amounts of wine Bannister witnessed there's no innocent explanation for it. However it doesn't make sense that Bannister would fabricate such a bizarre tale. He had no reason to. Also, another thing deniers do is ignore all the verifying cross references to the wine. Whenever you point out to these people that the wine was strongly witnessed by others than Bannister they ignore it and return with the "Tall Man" argument - which really doesn't answer the question. These people are just in plain denial that Bannister treated Jimi that morning, or remembered the wine he pulled out of his lungs.


I anxiously await the "Jimi wasn't murdered"; "There was no wine"; "Bannister wanted attention" the Hendrix fan intelligentsia prefer as their going standard here...

Scrum Drum
06-24-11, 01:28 PM
But still, nine pills is still a lot, more like a handful, while our Vestal Virgin took a neat one (half?) pill according to prescription, meaning that they took it together, or should we understand that our hero chucked the whole tube/package in his throat because he was no longer sober with MD watching? Shit happens but this is very strange, smelly shit that happened.


Monika didn't take any Vesparax that morning. She lied in order to make her going to sleep at 7am story sound plausible. If she took the 1 Vesparax she claimed she would have been zonked-out asleep.

One has to wonder if Jimi would have told Monika that he thought Devon had OD'ed him if he had just taken 9 sleeping pills? Jimi was savvy enough about drugs that even if he had taken what he thought were 9 Tuinols and felt a strong drug reaction he would have suspected it was the pills he had just taken. So we have to wonder if Monika's account of Jimi saying to her he thought Devon had OD'ed him was true? This raises some questions about how Jimi got the Vesparax into him? In any case you can't have a parallel conversation that doesn't engage these critical facts without any affect on your credibility. If Jimi did say to Monika he thought he had been OD'ed it wasn't because of anything Devon gave him. Jimi was smart enough about drugs to know that anything Devon had given him would have hit him much sooner than that. But he also knew Devon hadn't given him anything at Cameron's that would have OD'ed him. If Jimi said that it was in reaction to the Vesparax. These are the pertinent facts. Ignore them at your own expense.


PS - If Gesikang was paying attention the Vesparax came in packs of ten. If one tablet was found under the bed that means Jimi somehow took all ten from one plastic pack and dropped one (or someone else did). Monika never took any Vesparax.

purple jim
06-24-11, 01:46 PM
^ Monika told Kathy Etchingham, Mitch and Noel that she gave Jimi several vesparex. That's from Kathy's book, she hated Monika, so take it how you will but she wouldn't invent something that Mitch and Noel could disprove. She said that she gave Jimi some and the some more because "they were very weak"!!! WTF?
If she tried top push the blame over to Devon, that's quite revealing about her own guilt perhaps. She thought Jimi was her man.

Scrum Drum
06-24-11, 02:20 PM
We know Monika was a pathological liar. I just skimmed 'Final Days' yesterday and found Monika was claiming Jimi spent the night with her upon arrival in London on the 27th. However history shows Jimi napped-off some jet lag at the Londonderry Hotel that afternoon and then went to the Speakeasy where he picked-up Angela Burdon and an unnamed friend and spent the night with them at the Londonderry. The next morning they had the incident Kathy Etchingham told of at the Londonderry with Jimi trashing the room and locking the unclothed girls out. So let's get down to it and be frank here - Monika was nuts. She's crazy because she told easily-disproven lies in order to embellish her fantasy of London being her great matrimony rendezvous with Jimi. We'll put this aside for now because this could be a sign of her mind being cracked by some very evil people. I've read enough about intel hypnotic manchurian candidate assassination to see signs of a person operating under a programmed illusion and Monika certainly shows all the signs - or she was just crazy.

If Monika took some of those Vesparax for her back injury she had to know they weren't "weak". She had to know they were just the opposite. Once again, just about everything that comes from Monika's mouth is complete crazy bullshit that is just the opposite of what is true. What we are left with in relation to how Jimi got those pills into him is a sliding deck in a storm of non-truth. Where a smart person will go from there is to look at the wine and stories of murder to understand Monika's prevarication.

It is theoretically possible Monika murdered Jimi. However I don't think so because the evidence points more towards the Jeffery angle. The real question here is whether Monika's crazy lies extend as far as witnessing or even cooperating in Jimi's murder.

What really gives me the creeps is the little visible smirk Monika has in the post-death photos.

purple jim
06-24-11, 02:20 PM
No matter how many times you tell deniers that Teare's 100mg estimate was based on Monika's timescale it gets ignored.

Whatever. Alcohol was found in Jimi's blood as he had had a few drinks that evening, finishing it off with some "weak" sleeping pills according do the Damned woman.
By the way, you are the "denier" here, so stop using that cult-like term to describe those who don't agree with you, as if you are protecting some sort of sacred faith you silly person. It's fecking creepy.

MourningStar
06-24-11, 02:24 PM
To Scrum Drum :

Have you configured your account to not recieve PM's or have the mods/owner de-activated that feature for your account?

Scrum Drum
06-24-11, 02:33 PM
Whatever. Alcohol was found in Jimi's blood as he had had a few drinks that evening, finishing it off with some "weak" sleeping pills according do the Damned woman.
By the way, you are the "denier" her, so stop using that cult-like term to describe those who don't agree with you, as if you are protecting some sort of sacred faith you silly person. It's fecking creepy.



I think if you can force people into answers like that with good arguments and facts you've pretty much shown who has credibility and who doesn't and who is seriously discussing this and who isn't.

The information you are blowing-off there leads to the truth about how Jimi died.

Just answer the facts.

If you were seriously/competently arguing this you would realize that the true time period could tell us how much alcohol Jimi had in him and how long it would have taken to arrive at the 5mg/100ml level found at the autopsy. Since the real time period here is about 2 hours from 3:10am to 5:15am that means we could apply a scientific estimate of how long it would take Jimi's body to reduce his blood alcohol level to 5mgs. This would give you a better idea of his blood alcohol level when he ingested the Vesparax. It is very likely Jimi had no wine at the Samarkand except that which he was murdered with.

This simply can't be answered with "Whatever" by anyone seriously trying to find out what happened to Jimi.





.

Scrum Drum
06-24-11, 02:34 PM
To Scrum Drum :

Have you configured your account to not recieve PM's or have the mods/owner de-activated that feature for your account?


I haven't done anything.


.

purple jim
06-24-11, 03:38 PM
It is very likely Jimi had no wine at the Samarkand except that which he was murdered with.

Perhaps no wine at the Samarkand. Perhaps before. I think Meic Stevens saw what says he saw. He remembered that particular detail as it was Jimi Hendrix in front of him. When you meet someone of that stature, you remember the tiniest of details.
Bannister however got all mixed up with his recollections because he didn't know who the hell Jimi Hendrix was. He remembered another body and that was only when he fancied a bit of media attention and feeling of self-worth after having been struck off. Hell, I can't remember much with any detail if I try and think about what I did at work 25 years ago. I handled hundreds of day to day projects and it's all a blur now.

stplsd
06-24-11, 03:43 PM
Dr Teare made the assumption that Jimi's body reduced a large amount of wine, starting at the 100mg level, down to the recorded 5mg/100ml over that 8 hour period.

He didn't "assume" anything, you don't have a clue how he came to his estimate. You've completely missed a hugely significant factor which he would have used in his scientific calculation. I'll give you a chance to figure it out;-)

stplsd
06-24-11, 03:47 PM
I think Meic Stevens

The only evidence for Stevens' 'drinking with Jimi' yarn, is . . . his story;) It sounds ludicrous on several fronts. The main one being it doesn't fit in with anyone else's testimony, Jimi's known whereabouts.

Ezy Rider
06-25-11, 05:10 AM
^ Monika told Kathy Etchingham, Mitch and Noel that she gave Jimi several vesparex. That's from Kathy's book, she hated Monika, so take it how you will but she wouldn't invent something that Mitch and Noel could disprove. She said that she gave Jimi some and the some more because "they were very weak"!!! WTF?
If she tried top push the blame over to Devon, that's quite revealing about her own guilt perhaps. She thought Jimi was her man.

Apparently MD's father had a chemistry in Germany I read somewhere. In that case she should have been well aware of the effects. It could further explain how she got the pills in the first place, young girl traveling on her own to London for a few days and carrying a pack of killer sleeping pills on her.

manfree
06-25-11, 06:33 AM
Jimi; "Hey Babe I`m Wired - You got any Sleepers?"
MD;"Yeah Jimi, but they`re really really Strong"
Jimi; "thats ok, I`ll only take 8 or 9"
MD; Don`t be silly, thats enough to kill ya"
Jimi; "Hey, It`s Jimi you`re talkin to, It`ll be nice with the wine, I`m cool
MD; "Oh thats OK then, Maybe I`ll go to sleep too, Dont forget to lie on your back!"

stplsd
06-25-11, 09:08 AM
Apparently MD's father had a chemistry in Germany I read somewhere. In that case she should have been well aware of the effects. Maybe he was maybe he wasn't. You don't need a chemist to tell you to read the instructions.


It could further explain how she got the pills in the first place, young girl traveling on her own to London for a few days and carrying a pack of killer sleeping pills on her.
There is no mystery how she got the tablets, they were commonly prescribed in those days. So no "explanation" needed. She wasn't very young. How do you know how long she was intending to stay in London. She had several packs anyway, not just one. Half a tablet was not strong. A whole one was weaker than two reds.

hendrixxx360
06-25-11, 09:49 AM
What about the fact that jimi was found with a scarf around his neck in all his clothes lying on the bed face up his hair completely matted down in red wine and red wine completely filled up his lungs and when the dr.s seen him they said they never seen anybody who had drownd in red wine like someone had held him down and poured it into him this is in the dr.s report jimi was water boarded to death plain and simple

johanincr
06-25-11, 10:18 AM
What about the fact [...]

Is that a fact and can you prove it? (thats a rhetorical question!)

purple jim
06-25-11, 10:52 AM
What about the fact that jimi was found with a scarf around his neck in all his clothes lying on the bed face up his hair completely matted down in red wine and red wine completely filled up his lungs and when the dr.s seen him they said they never seen anybody who had drownd in red wine like someone had held him down and poured it into him this is in the dr.s report jimi was water boarded to death plain and simpleix

Hi Hendrixxx360, welcome to the forum.
All this "wine" thing only came from statements by one of the doctors (Bannister). The other doctor (Seifert) made no mention of wine and said that the team hardly worked on Hendrix at all as he was obviously very dead on arrival. This guy Bannister started putting his story around in the 90s and he also said that the body was of an "unusually tall man" who's legs stuck out about 10 inches over the end of the table! So obviously he was remembering another case from long ago in the late 60s or early 70s. Jimi was covered in vomit, not wine.

stplsd
06-25-11, 11:33 AM
ix

Hi Hendrixxx360, welcome to the forum.
All this "wine" thing only came from statements by one of the doctors (Bannister)

The main thing everone should keep in mind is that when Bannister first mentioned the wine he was awaiting the verdict of the medical tribunal in 1992, on several charges of medical malpracrice (two of which were found proven), and the case of fraud (for which he was struck of the medical register, never to be re-instated) He only mentioned the wine after he'd read Monika's statement that they drank some wine that evening and that they were in the habit of drinking it regulary. And more importantly that Monika had accused the Doctor in charge (ie him) of malpractice in failing to perform a tracheotomy. No wine, never mind the large amount he claimed, had hitherto or has subsequently been mentioned by anyone else inconnection with his death, including the other two doctors, ambulance men, police, the pathologist or the coroner - only Bannister (a proven liar for personal gain). Given these factors it appears to be nothing more than a panic stricken excuse on his part.

Scrum Drum
06-25-11, 01:02 PM
He didn't "assume" anything, you don't have a clue how he came to his estimate. You've completely missed a hugely significant factor which he would have used in his scientific calculation. I'll give you a chance to figure it out;-)



This answer doesn't say anything. My facts stand and you obviously couldn't answer them directly.


If anyone is reading this those who are seriously pursuing this wouldn't accept this level of uncertainty and just leave it at that as deniers do. In the case of murder evidence you can't just say "you have no idea what calculations he used" and just leave it at that. You have to go out and find out exactly what calculations were used. In fact, because nobody ever bothered to do that is exactly why there was never any processing of the real evidence.

If anyone is seriously paying attention to what we reasonably know (instead of just offering useless offhand denial remarks) the doctors determined Jimi must have died enroute to hospital because they took Monika's story for real. We know the Inquest took Monika's story for real, so therefore the doctors had to have used it to make their calculations. Their calculations were based off the official story that the Inquest accepted without question.

The difference between those honestly pursuing this and deniers is deniers are perfectly willing to say we don't know how they determined their calculations and just leave it at that. Persons seriously interested in the topic would know that wasn't good enough and seek to find out exactly how the autopsists came to their conclusions.

Wise people will see that the information I discussed about alcohol digestion rates is valid and most definitely applies. They will understand that no matter how Teare came to his conclusions that it is anatomically impossible for Jimi's blood alcohol level to go from 100mg at the time of Vesparax ingestion down to 5mg/100ml at the time of death in only 2 hours. So anyone with any honesty would admit that Teare obviously made his calculations using the assumption that Monika's story was accurate and Jimi had about 8 hours to digest the wine.

It's obvious from their replies that deniers can't or won't admit this and self-exposingly show no interest in figuring it out. If anyone had any sincere information about how Teare made his calculations they would just come forward with it and say it. Only people here for deceptive purposes play these denial games - and they do so at Jimi's expense.

This stuff is all connected to solid science. Solid science that is obviously being dodged by even those in the highest positions. THAT's what people should be figuring out.

MourningStar
06-25-11, 01:16 PM
... people who care about Jimi and want to do justice for him are "negative" and those who blow-off his diabolical murder at the first slight breeze are "positive" - sure. All cool cats never make anyone uptight and only those who have like bad vibes man go around bothering people with the uncomfortable evidence for Jimi's murder. Yep. I've experienced a tendency in the Hendrix Community that when you press the needed points to show how Jimi was murdered people respond by saying we need to shut this down or "this topic sucks". Hmm. There's enough people hunting down remaining film footage. The murder business isn't hampering anything. If you seal this shut you do so in the face of Jimi Hendrix reaching out to us from the past and begging for justice.

Forgive me for saying this but .... sounds like "Don't hang people up on negative things like murder just see if Jimi has any valuables in his pockets before we scoot and leave him hanging". After all, we have to worry about the feelings of people who never backed Jimi when he was murdered over Jimi himself, who it is OK to just leave there hanging as long as people aren't made to feel bad. Sorry, but the morality I've always known has a word for that and it isn't flattering. It will make you lots of friends but it will do so at Jimi's expense.

Yeah, I'm sure Jimi would say "Hey cats don't worry about my being wickedly betrayed and murdered - just have fun and only think about yourselves"! If you really read what Jimi was saying in his quotes he was saying "We've got to tell children the truth, they don't need a whole lot of lies". He also mentioned something about breezy sliders and jellyfish without a bone their jelly back. Funny how people who would never tolerate themselves being murdered in such a wicked way are so willing to encourage disinterest at the expense of Jimi or justice for him. Funny, "living in the past" doesn't seem to stop the huge interest in Hendrix and his music 40 years later.

There's a lot that was never said that is currently on these message boards exactly because people who didn't buy that call to indifference went out and pursued it. Trust me, the people who murdered Jimi and covered it up love hearing people call for no action. The way you have to think of it is every time you call for inaction the hands that are strangling Jimi grow tighter around his neck. Sorry, but the Hendrix Community's indifference towards this is just dead weight as far getting justice for Jimi. Funny how they don't seem to mind how they serve as a negative themselves or how the case has progressed despite their efforts. ... Unfortunately, it's about time people realized we are still talking about this 40 years later exactly because people took that attitude and didn't do what was necessary to defend Jimi.

People who want to defend Jimi and do justice for him are stuck in between corrupt authorities who refuse to practice what they preach and a weird celebration ethic that serves as an equal deterrent. Calling for indifference is hardly a noble position and grinds against most understood definitions of moral justice. In the end there's no difference between that position and people who come right out and say "I don't give a f***". If you listen to what Jimi said in his music he was fighting a war. If Jimi died as a brave soldier in that war and forced his adversaries to resort to scummy tactics and gutter murder it's important people know it. Geesh, I hope Hendrix fans are big enough to be able to talk straight to each other in a respectful but direct way. I think Jimi would be all for that as well - especially when it concerns his MURDER! The way you have to look at it is Jimi is being denied the high status he deserves that led to his murder. The authorities don't want to admit they kill people of peace, so they'll be all for calls for indifference. Those who call for celebrating Jimi don't realize they are helping deny what was most important about him and what Jimi himself cared for the most - if you listen carefully.

There are people out there right now who know how Jimi died. I think people know how close they are which is why they want to avoid it.


I voted Jeffery murdered Jimi ...Well, then 'providence' has interceded and accomplished your quest for justice when Jeffery perished in a most horrific manner a few years after murdering Hendrix. Based on this, your cause célèbre appears superflous, yes?

Scrum Drum
06-25-11, 01:53 PM
What about the fact that jimi was found with a scarf around his neck in all his clothes lying on the bed face up his hair completely matted down in red wine and red wine completely filled up his lungs and when the dr.s seen him they said they never seen anybody who had drownd in red wine like someone had held him down and poured it into him this is in the dr.s report jimi was water boarded to death plain and simple


Hendrixxx360:


If you participate in this thread you'll quickly find-out there are some dishonest people trying to present cheap defense lawyer arguments as sincere or ruling the issue. Those honestly investigating this topic will understand that Bannister originally simply dismissed the large amount of wine he witnessed as part of the vomit that killed Jimi in some reckless drug and alcohol event. A true evaluation of the event would recognize that Bannister read an account of Monika accusing him of malpractice in Shapiro's book and reacted by coming forward and telling what he witnessed. People are smart enough to see dishonest persons trying to muddy this with disingenuous interpretations of Bannister's witnessing. They are simply throwing crap at Bannister and from their arguments are obviously not interested in honestly investigating this.

If you followed this thread none of these people have answered my point that the wine was cross-referenced enough to know it didn't originate from Bannister alone. These deniers try to hide in plain sight over the fact they can't answer that. Monika spoke about the wine with such emotion that it had to be something that pained her and was therefore real. Deniers ignore this. Also, they give no consideration to the fact Burdon and the road crew members could have come forward and testified to the condition of the wine bottles we know were on the scene as admitted by Monika and other witnesses. The fact those clean-up crew witnesses stay mum on the status of the wine bottles tells you all you need to know if you are honestly investigating this. Defense argument deniers simply ignore this because they have no real interest in the truth.

A cogent/honest look into the wine witnessing would realize Bannister had the best perspective on the wine because he was the one who suctioned it out. Doctor Siefert quit because Jimi was obviously Dead On Arrival. Bannister stayed and proceeded to unplug a cork of vomit from Jimi's windpipe. Behind that vomit obstruction he then discovered "masses of red wine issuing out". He then proceeded to drain Jimi's organs (including his lungs) of this wine. So much so as to determine Jimi Hendrix had been drowned in this wine. This is the truth that deniers are obviously trying to deny by cheap character-defamation tactics. Their efforts aren't honest or sincere (as their arguments more than show). They need to dismiss Bannister because of their obvious awareness that once you realize Jimi Hendrix was drowned in wine there's no innocent explanation for it by means of the official accounts. In the end Doctor Bannister is a trained medical doctor who witnessed wine drowning Jimi Hendrix. And his detractors are just internet posters trying to deny the British Government participated in the covering-up of Jimi's murder.

Deniers will ignore everything I just wrote and return to their same lacking points that are obviously way behind where we are on this. Their method is obviously taking advantage of contrived vulnerabilities rather than pursuing the facts as they go or recognizing the truth.

Scrum Drum
06-25-11, 02:38 PM
Perhaps no wine at the Samarkand. Perhaps before. I think Meic Stevens saw what says he saw. He remembered that particular detail as it was Jimi Hendrix in front of him. When you meet someone of that stature, you remember the tiniest of details.


This is a perfect example of why you people don't have any credibility. I suppose you're not interested in adding the input that Jimi was never at the Scotch Of St James that night? A minor detail perhaps that you might not want to interfere with your allegedly sincere input here. Jimi was at Harvey's where he might have had a glass of wine before 10pm. He then went to Cameron's and stayed there until Monika picked him up.





Bannister however got all mixed up with his recollections because he didn't know who the hell Jimi Hendrix was. He remembered another body and that was only when he fancied a bit of media attention and feeling of self-worth after having been struck off. Hell, I can't remember much with any detail if I try and think about what I did at work 25 years ago. I handled hundreds of day to day projects and it's all a blur now.


It's goofy to not realize the backwardness of this suggestion. Stevens is obviously the one who is mixed-up here. It's common sense that if Clapton and the members of Marmalade witnessed Jimi taking glass pint mugs of red wine at the Scotch there would have been more witnesses to this. The fact you promote this obviously untrue account over Bannister puts you and your arguments in place. Thank you.

And don't bother trying to relate Jimi's low blood alcohol content to this obviously apocryphal tale. People who have studied this business will see MI-6 disinformation desperately appear in the same publications that defamed Jimi as a heroin overdose right after his death.

Bannister firmly remembered Jimi because after he had treated him he was informed who he was. He then had the memory burned in to him because of the Inquest and its importance shortly after.

stplsd
06-25-11, 03:12 PM
This is a perfect example of why you people don't have any credibility

You're a perfect example of why "you people" (is there more than one?) don't have any credibility;)

Scrum Drum
06-25-11, 03:13 PM
Well, then 'providence' has interceded and accomplished your quest for justice when Jeffery perished in a most horrific manner a few years after murdering Hendrix. Based on this, your cause célèbre appears superflous, yes?


I'm glad you mentioned this because I further researched the plane accident and found out it is possible Jeffery's plane crashed by freak accident. The french military air traffic controllers who were rushed-in to cover for the striking civilian controllers sent two planes on the same flight level to the same air traffic coordinates. The Spantax Coronado was early on its scheduled arrival at the Nantes beacon so it tried to contact French ATC to ask for a holding pattern. Jeffery's Iberia airlines DC-9 was behind schedule so it was further behind on its flight path than it was expected to be. After not getting any response from ATC the Spantax jet executed a holding loop in order to stall its arrival over the Nantes radio guidance beacon. When the pilot got 180 degrees into this turn he impacted Jeffery's jet head-on disintegrating it in flight. Miraculously the Spantax jet had only sliced the Iberia jet with its wing tip and was able to land.

Since the maneuver was randomly, manually initiated it does suggest it wasn't guided by intel subterfuge. However I won't dismiss the possibility because I've seen too many cases of government manipulation of testimony and would have to find out what the pilots said exactly first.

As to karma covering everything - well they're still sticking to the official story saying Jimi died from reckless drug use.

Rupe
06-25-11, 03:17 PM
And you still haven't explained, Scrum Drum, how Bannister, with his firm memory, managed to confuse a clothed, 5ft 11 man, possibly wearing a scarf, with a very tall, naked man, wearing a jumper round his neck. Surely a doctor would be able to tell the difference, even if his memory was challenged.

stplsd
06-25-11, 03:21 PM
This answer doesn't say anything. My facts stand and you obviously couldn't answer them directly.
You're answer says everything. ie You can't come up with any references to back up your wild claims (ie your "facts"). Apart from giving a reply that further displays you have absolutely no understanding of even the rudimentary basics of pathology/biology. ie You still can't see what is staring you in the face that you've missed regarding how Teare calculated his 100mg blood alcohol from (that's to presume that Brown's transcript is in fact accurate). I'll give you a little more time;)

stplsd
06-25-11, 03:27 PM
and the members of Marmalade

There you go again. You just can't read what's there. I'll give you a chance to figure out what you've missed;)

purple jim
06-25-11, 03:46 PM
you people.
Oh dear, he went and said it.


I suppose you're not interested in adding the input that Jimi was never at the Scotch Of St James that night?

We don't know where he was for each and every half hour. It might not have been the Scotch but another bar and Stevens can't remember which one precisely.




Stevens is obviously the one who is mixed-up here. It's common sense that if Clapton and the members of Marmalade witnessed Jimi taking glass pint mugs of red wine at the Scotch there would have been more witnesses to this. The fact you promote this obviously untrue account over Bannister puts you and your arguments in place. Thank you.

You've got it all wrong there. Clapton has said that he saw Jimi that night but didn't go over to meet him. So he wouldn't have seen what he was drinking.
Read Stevens' account again. "‘[Hendrix] was drinking lager or some kind of beer and he just poured the wine in to the pint glass." He only talks about one glass of red wine being tossed into a pint of lager. Then all of sudden you come along and turn that into "Jimi taking glass pint mugs of red wine". I thought you were supposed to be the "smart", the "wise" person here. You can't even make sense of a newspaper article, no wonder you have taken yourself into such a blind alley with your conspiracy theory.
It's plainly obvious that Bannister was remembering another case.

Hey Scrumdrum, how do you feel about the upcoming Winterland box set?

Fenders Fingers
06-25-11, 03:51 PM
If you participate in this thread you'll quickly find-out there are some dishonest people.....................

Opinionated people, strong mined people etc. Just like yourself SD.
Take care in what you say please.
Thanks la :-)

manfree
06-25-11, 03:52 PM
[QUOTE=purple jim;


Hey Scrumdrum, how do you feel about the upcoming Winterland box set?[/QUOTE]
HaHa, Who`s that by Then?

Scrum Drum
06-25-11, 04:00 PM
And you still haven't explained, Scrum Drum, how Bannister, with his firm memory, managed to confuse a clothed, 5ft 11 man, possibly wearing a scarf, with a very tall, naked man, wearing a jumper round his neck. Surely a doctor would be able to tell the difference, even if his memory was challenged.


That's rather a moot point, isn't it, considering? I would counter that it was your turn first to explain why this statement overrides all the evidence I discussed? It doesn't. I think people are willingly deluding themselves that this "Tall Man" statement overturns or discounts all the obvious evidence I discussed. I think it's more than obvious that the reason people keep returning to this statement instead of recognizing the truth in what I argued is because they know they can't refute it.

I'm not sure why Bannister said that. It could have been because he had been intimidated by Scotland Yard and realized he had unknowingly gotten into something extremely dangerous. The FBI and intel killed people who witnessed the real truth behind the Kennedy Assassination. In any case, I doubt Bannister decided to make up a crazy story about suctioning a suspicious amount of wine out of Hendrix "like he had never seen in his medical career" (not many people are waterboarded to death with wine). It matters not because the real timeline here shows Bannister witnessed the wine and then locked it in to his memory when he was shocked to realize who he had treated. He knew he was talking about Hendrix because it was the patient who had the 'towel' around his neck. When we look at Monika's photos of Jimi from the Samarkand that day Jimi is wearing Monika's large scarf around his neck. Those are the clothes he died in. This alone should be good enough to verify Bannister's witnessing. Bannister then knew this patient had a serious Inquest 10 days later. It was Jimi all right. Remember, the wine was cross-witnessed on many levels by many people.

stplsd
06-25-11, 04:07 PM
Clapton has said that he saw Jimi that night but didn't go over to meet him. So he wouldn't have seen what he was drinking.

I'm afraid he didn't, old chap. He said he saw Jimi at a Sly Stone concert the day before, that he took the left handed guitar hoping to meet him there. But according to the tour itinererary it was actually 4 days previous that Sly played London Sly was in Leicester that night and on the 17th when Mitch said they picked him up at the airport he would have been (can't remember offhand, but miles from London anyway) so it does appear he had also got his dates mixed up after thirty odd years. Eric by several accounts seems to have been on a downward slide into heavy substance abuse (that includes alcohol by-the-way) at this time;)

It was an interesting find, but face it PJ, it really looks like Stevens read the story about the wine in Rock Roadie or reports about it (it's everywhere) and was just spinning a yarn (as those other two did before, although he's much less cynical and without that much to gain - if anything), it's obvious;)

MourningStar
06-25-11, 04:19 PM
Well, then 'providence' has interceded and accomplished your quest for justice when Jeffery perished in a most horrific manner a few years after murdering Hendrix. Based on this, your cause célèbre appears superflous, yes?I'm glad you mentioned this because I further researched the plane accident and found out it is possible Jeffery's plane crashed by freak accident. The french military air traffic controllers who were rushed-in to cover for the striking civilian controllers sent two planes on the same flight level to the same air traffic coordinates. The Spantax Coronado was early on its scheduled arrival at the Nantes beacon so it tried to contact French ATC to ask for a holding pattern. Jeffery's Iberia airlines DC-9 was behind schedule so it was further behind on its flight path than it was expected to be. After not getting any response from ATC the Spantax jet executed a holding loop in order to stall its arrival over the Nantes radio guidance beacon. When the pilot got 180 degrees into this turn he impacted Jeffery's jet head-on disintegrating it in flight. Miraculously the Spantax jet had only sliced the Iberia jet with its wing tip and was able to land.

Since the maneuver was randomly, manually initiated it does suggest it wasn't guided by intel subterfuge. However I won't dismiss the possibility because I've seen too many cases of government manipulation of testimony and would have to find out what the pilots said exactly first.

As to karma covering everything - well they're still sticking to the official story saying Jimi died from reckless drug use.All very enlightening. However, you are on record in your belief that Hendrix was murdered by Jeffery and want justice. Indeed, you have pontificated at great length as to your sincere desire for 'justice'. Do you not understand that justice was accomplished when Jeffery perished? Providence has judged, death sentence declared and execution carried out. What's left?

Rupe
06-25-11, 04:19 PM
[QUOTE=Scrum Drum;55583]That's rather a moot point, isn't it, considering?

It's not a moot point at all. It's as plain as a pikestaff that Bannister is not a reliable witness.

Scrum Drum
06-25-11, 04:23 PM
Clapton has said that he saw Jimi that night but didn't go over to meet him. So he wouldn't have seen what he was drinking.
Read Stevens' account again. "‘[Hendrix] was drinking lager or some kind of beer and he just poured the wine in to the pint glass." He only talks about one glass of red wine being tossed into a pint of lager. Then all of sudden you come along and turn that into "Jimi taking glass pint mugs of red wine". I thought you were supposed to be the "smart", the "wise" person here. You can't even make sense of a newspaper article, no wonder you have taken yourself into such a blind alley with your conspiracy theory.
It's plainly obvious that Bannister was remembering another case.




Sorry, but that dog don't hunt.


Try to answer directly how Jimi Hendrix, probably the most popular figure in London that night, could walk in to the crowded Scotch Of St James on the most controversial and covered night of his life and not have any other people witness it? They would have wondered if he was going to jam and had other people saying: "Yeah, I was at the Scotch that night and Jimi walked in and we were all excited because we thought he might play". Do you honestly think that Stevens would be the only witness to this? Your analytical technique is credulous. If you intelligently analyzed this you would admit that Jimi was fully witnessed at Harvey's; he was then fully witnessed by many people at Cameron's; yet at this alleged Scotch of St James wine festival there was only Meic Stevens.

Your going directly to ad hominem at the end of your last post tells me you know I'm right.


But smart people would once again realize that even if Steven's story was true that any wine drinking at the Scotch would have occurred so far before the Samarkand that it would have been too far into digestion to reconcile with the forensic evidence. The "masses of wine" are too voluminous to reconcile with either the wine Jimi allegedly drank in front of Stevens or his condition at Cameron's for the many hours he was witnessed by Stella, Devon and many others as being there. It's common sense that if this alleged wine Stevens witnessed was somehow involved in Jimi's death that it would have needed to be so large that it would have been witnessed at Cameron's, and since Jimi was firmly seen mingling at Cameron's in reasonably OK condition this story simply doesn't make sense by comparison to the known facts. Again, I submit the fact you don't realize this only emphasizes your total incompetence and disqualification in the matter. The London Daily Mail as well...

Scrum Drum
06-25-11, 04:25 PM
[QUOTE=Scrum Drum;55583]That's rather a moot point, isn't it, considering?

It's not a moot point at all. It's as plain as a pikestaff that Bannister is not a reliable witness.


What's plain here is you're reaching around all the evidence to make that conclusion. What the evidence forces you to do is what people will see the most.

Scrum Drum
06-25-11, 04:28 PM
All very enlightening. However, you are on record in your belief that Hendrix was murdered by Jeffery and want justice. Indeed, you have pontificated at great length as to your sincere desire for 'justice'. Do you not understand that justice was accomplished when Jeffery perished? Providence has judged, death sentence declared and execution carried out. What's left?


This was already answered.


You should be smart enough to see that the authorities are still backing Monika's story because Jimi's murder had to do with much more than just a business matter between him and his manager...

Rupe
06-25-11, 04:32 PM
Scrum Drum, since you have so cleverly uncovered the murder plot and revealed it to us all, aren't you a bit afraid that the British Govt/FBI/Intel/CIA/Scotland Yard etc. will now be coming looking for YOU?
"Smart people" would go into hiding.

stplsd
06-25-11, 05:14 PM
And you still haven't explained, Scrum Drum, how Bannister, with his firm memory, managed to confuse a clothed, 5ft 11 man, possibly wearing a scarf, with a very tall, naked man, wearing a jumper round his neck. Surely a doctor would be able to tell the difference, even if his memory was challenged.

ie It looks entirely like he'd read/heard Jimi was really tall, as he has been described quite often in the press, and this ended up tacked on to the end of his story about the wine as a (very long time after the event) after thought that he apparently thought made his story sound more credible - of course it didn't. "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to decieve."

stplsd
06-25-11, 05:22 PM
Scrum Drum, since you have so cleverly uncovered the murder plot and revealed it to us all, aren't you a bit afraid that the British Govt/FBI/Intel/CIA/Scotland Yard etc. will now be coming looking for YOU?
"Smart people" would go into hiding.

Yeah, looks like your days are numbered, oh-oh!

univibs
06-25-11, 05:23 PM
Jmi died in the Samarkand flat: Nope! (CG statment)




KD: Maybe what he's saying is that Jimi died somewhere else and his body was then moved to Monica's !

and who carry the body, ? Monica , she was a skinny model...

purple jim
06-25-11, 05:27 PM
Sorry y'all, I thought Clapton had spied Jimi on the night of the 17th.


I think people are willingly deluding themselves that this "Tall Man" statement overturns or discounts all the obvious evidence I discussed.

It's not a delusion, it's just about facing facts. You are extremely rigourous and precise in your analysis, yet you pass over this glaring fact which definitively discredits Bannister's entire statement. Jimi was NOT an unusually tall man.

stplsd
06-25-11, 05:41 PM
You are extremely rigourous and precise in your analysis
Give us a break PJ, the guy's as sloppy as diarrhoea. I've given him two chances to come up with what he's missed that's in his face, just in the last couple of hours and he still hasn't addressed them, nevermind come up with the goods. The guy has no idea.

Rupe
06-25-11, 05:53 PM
Too right!

Rupe
06-25-11, 05:53 PM
[QUOTE=Rupe;55588]


What's plain here is you're reaching around all the evidence to make that conclusion. What the evidence forces you to do is what people will see the most.

Is this even English?

stplsd
06-25-11, 06:03 PM
The "masses of wine" are too voluminous to reconcile with. . .

. . . any other testimony, or even credibility and mark his story as nothing more than a stark staringly obvious, deceitful and inept attempt by Bannister to cover his arse over a further charge of malpractice on top of the several he was already facing at the time (not to menton the fraud, which was seen by the first and succeeding tribunals as serious enough for him to have been struck off the medical register permanently, despite his several attempts over the years to be re-instated)

MourningStar
06-25-11, 07:35 PM
... the authorities are still backing Monika's story because Jimi's murder had to do with much more than just a business matter between him and his manager...your and your responders are being repetitive to the point of exhaustion. i now admit my error in giving you credit for tenacity. by now, your persistence only reveals your inability to comprehend that your detractors cannot be brought into your camp short of an official acknowledgement by all the agencies you assign ultimate responsibilty. i was wrong in thinking you intelligent enough to realize this. perhaps your life is one of lonliness and CTT is one of a few outlets that can give you some sort of respite. sad. i will now retire to my easy-chair, pop-corn and drink - have a good life.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

ilovejimi
06-25-11, 07:43 PM
I know the answer: it was a surprise attack that killed him in his sleep that night............................................. .and so castles made of sand (blah blah woof woof).

MourningStar
06-25-11, 09:15 PM
I know the answer: it was a surprise attack that killed him in his sleep that night............................................. .and so castles made of sand (blah blah woof woof).http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

MourningStar
06-25-11, 10:51 PM
Jimi looked into the future, saw disco on the horizon, said "fuck it", and ate all the pills and drank all the wine he could find.Nah - he would have just re-formed Band Of Gypsys and just swept that shit out of the way! Hendrix always conquered anything in his path. Now, let's see, who could he have brought in to blow that 'punk scene/phase' out of the water, hmmm ...

MourningStar
06-25-11, 11:34 PM
... Now, let's see, who could he have brought in to blow that 'punk scene/phase' out of the water, hmmm ...Entwhistle & Moon?

Scrum Drum
06-26-11, 12:10 AM
your and your responders are being repetitive to the point of exhaustion. i now admit my error in giving you credit for tenacity. by now, your persistence only reveals your inability to comprehend that your detractors cannot be brought into your camp short of an official acknowledgement by all the agencies you assign ultimate responsibilty. i was wrong in thinking you intelligent enough to realize this. perhaps your life is one of lonliness and CTT is one of a few outlets that can give you some sort of respite. sad. i will now retire to my easy-chair, pop-corn and drink - have a good life.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif



You brought as much in to this as you left it with - nothing. Don't sweat it you'll still remain in favor with the care-nots.

Scrum Drum
06-26-11, 12:12 AM
. . . any other testimony, or even credibility and mark his story as nothing more than a stark staringly obvious, deceitful and inept attempt by Bannister to cover his arse over a further charge of malpractice on top of the several he was already facing at the time (not to menton the fraud, which was seen by the first and succeeding tribunals as serious enough for him to have been struck off the medical register permanently, despite his several attempts over the years to be re-instated)


As long as you ignore the cross references with the wine you're just smearing brown matter with a broad brush from a pompous podium with your pants down. Good arguments usually get the trolls to reveal themselves.

stplsd
06-26-11, 03:44 AM
As long as you ignore the cross references with the wine you're just smearing brown matter with a broad brush from a pompous podium with your pants down. Good arguments usually get the trolls to reveal themselves.

Temper, temper;)

Nothing has been ignored. It's all there for everyone to see who is the one who has been doing the ignoring (at the 'Political harrassment & Murder' thread: http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?864-The-Jimi-Hendrix-Political-Harassment-Kidnap-and-Murder-Experience, where you, me & everyone else have made almost exactly the same arguments and where this has been thoroughly addressed, not to mention endlessly re-cycled). You still haven't found the major factor Teare used to calculaction his 100mg estimate of the blood alcohol level (that you missed) There are others too. (that's to assume that Tony Brown didn't make an error in his transcript in the firstplace - which you have also failed to address)

As for you're "troll" comment. That would require you to have made a good argument. There don't appear to be too many here that have such a high regard for your abilities in that respect as you do;)

Because someone presents an argument that disagrees with yours does not make them a "troll" or a "denier" it means they see your argument as being faulty. It's up to you to convince them otherwise. Apparently your ignoring many points, failure to address researched documents published by the medical establishment and other expert testimony, lack of basic knowledge, poor understanding of written material provided to you (as you obviously hadn't read very much on the subject when you embarked on your ill-informed "crusade") and continually insulting language implying that anyone who diagreed with you was not "smart", not "intelligent" etc etc. has failed to impress.
Your hectoring, extremely verbose "style", reminiscent of a Stalinist show trial/Fox News, is a blatant attempt to 'smokescreen' your failings that few will have failed to see through.

purple jim
06-26-11, 04:20 AM
Another thing that proves that Bannister's memory is muddled is the fact that he says he worked on Hendrix's body "for about half an hour". This is a flat-liner, a body that has already been pronounced dead by Dr. Seifert who saw that there was no hope after a matter of minutes (just as the ambulance men had). No doctor (except Baron Frankenstein) would come along and attempt another "half an hour" of ressucitation on a body already pronounced dead by another doctor! Bannister did perhaps perform that suction operation but it was on another body at another time, on an "unusually tall man" as he plainly stated.
Another thing, back at the flat, it can't be assumed that Danneman coldy watched as Jimi lay vomiting and chocking profusely. We weren't there. She might have seen a trickle of vomit and left the bedroom to make the call to Burdon. Even a 60 second absence from the room would have been enough time for Jimi to vomit profusely in the way he did.
This doesn't mean that I defending the skater from hell in any way, in fact I think she was the cause of Jimi's death, deliberately or not.

stplsd
06-26-11, 04:35 AM
^
For feck's sake what are you doing PJ? We've already been over that umpteen times (sigh - that's what happens when you have two threads on the same subject - mods?). Both of the other doctors have said he was DOA and unsaveable, as Bannister himself has said! If you're going to start on the "faulty memory", again, you might at least do me the courtesy of addressing my point that "blatant falsification" would be more appropriate given his circumstances when he made the statement (not to mention he was shortly after found guilty of fraud) just saying "perhaps" is not addressing this sufficiently. Feel free to disagree;)

Fenders Fingers
06-26-11, 06:57 AM
Mods what? You guys are doing a great job of talking through both holes at the same time so why not two threads lol
Seriously though, merging these would be just as confusing. Possibly closing them is the only real option as, like stplsd says, just repeats now. It seems it's down to who can say the same thing the most.

stplsd
06-26-11, 07:04 AM
Seriously though, merging these would be just as confusing.

Yeah, it's a bit late for that. Don't see an overwhelming case for closing it though, apart from it being extremely tedious/taking up too much space.

Fenders Fingers
06-26-11, 07:11 AM
I have no intention (at this stage and for now) of closing these threads.
They have raised some questions worth thinking about and researching.

Like that word stplsd ............................. tedious in relation to the ongoing "debate"

Closing, it's just an option besides merging !

stplsd
06-26-11, 07:44 AM
The autopsy found only the chemicals of Vesparax in Jimi's system.
On with the tedium, ho-hum . . . No. It found amphetamine and alcohol as well.

Fenders Fingers
06-26-11, 07:52 AM
May as well join in for a bit :-)
Amphet's V's ale and sleeping pills in the system. Hmmm, enought to kill anyone daft enough to mix this lot at the same time.

purple jim
06-26-11, 07:56 AM
Because someone presents an argument that disagrees with yours does not make them a "troll" or a "denier" it means they see your argument as being faulty..

Here, here.


and continually insulting language implying that anyone who diagreed with you was not "smart", not "intelligent" etc etc. has failed to impress.

Here, here.


^
For feck's sake what are you doing PJ? We've already been over that umpteen times

I know but if someone keeps talking about the pints of wine in Jim's lungs, one has to step in to underline that it is untrue. Hell, even papers like the Daily Mail are taking Bannister's declarations as gospel now and young fans are being indoctrinated with this garbage. I think the whole thing has been sufficiently discussed here now. Let's please wait and see what Caesar Glebeek has to tell us.

stplsd
06-26-11, 08:26 AM
Yeah, I suppose so. I've had enough of listening to the "Witchfinder General", he should apply for a job as a torturer at gitmo

purple jim
06-26-11, 09:09 AM
the "Witchfinder General"

http://www.noob.fr/upload/8d0b2_films.jpg (http://www.noob.fr)

Good old Vince.

Ezy Rider
06-26-11, 10:34 AM
Let's please wait and see what Caesar Glebeek has to tell us.

Well, you have to empty your pockets to read it, while it cannot be anything more than what has been posted here on CTT, and that is for free:o

And BTW, can't we just start a "MD-Witch Hunt"-thread or a "Witchhunter General"-thread just to bug STPLSD? nga-nga-nga

purple jim
06-26-11, 11:13 AM
Well, you have to empty your pockets to read it, while it cannot be anything more than what has been posted here on CTT, and that is for free

Hold your horses pardner, looks like the great Caesar has some new evidence.

Sharpstat
06-26-11, 12:08 PM
Hold your horses pardner, looks like the great Caesar has some new evidence.

Maybe someone finally talked? Broke the code finally.popcorn1

Scrum Drum
06-26-11, 03:05 PM
Another thing that proves that Bannister's memory is muddled is the fact that he says he worked on Hendrix's body "for about half an hour". This is a flat-liner, a body that has already been pronounced dead by Dr. Seifert who saw that there was no hope after a matter of minutes (just as the ambulance men had). No doctor (except Baron Frankenstein) would come along and attempt another "half an hour" of ressucitation on a body already pronounced dead by another doctor! Bannister did perhaps perform that suction operation but it was on another body at another time, on an "unusually tall man" as he plainly stated.


The more you talk the more you prove my case. Anyone with an ounce of common sense would realize that many emergency patients are worked-on until it is certain they are dead. The reason your posts are inherently self-destructive like this one is because it is common knowledge that ER doctors practice every available chance of resuscitation on a regular basis as is their job to do so. Your desperate contrivance of known Emergency Room practices is self-exposing and shows that you are trying to bend reality against something you are well-aware of. The simple truth of this is Bannister practiced basic practical medical pathology by first working on the patient to clear their airway in order to make this possible resuscitation work. When viewed in honest terms and not forced denial contrivances Bannister's actions are exactly what a trained medical doctor would do to perform such a possible recovery. It's silly to deny this because anyone with any common sense would realize many people have been brought back to life from pretty dire circumstances and that Bannister's job was not to ask but to try until proven hopeless. Trying to force Bannister into this contrived definition of Emergency Room practices is bombastic on its face and reveals the nature of those trying to deny this, and their methods. Bannister was there and these people weren't. But, once again, these people are marching naked because they still believe they possess credibility even after being totally unable to address the cross-references to the wine. These people suggest Bannister treated somebody else, but if you apply their own methods of proof against them themselves they fail to produce who this mystery individual was. That man doesn't exist and they know it, but that doesn't matter to them because they're not here to determine the truth, they're just here to deny the murder.



Another thing, back at the flat, it can't be assumed that Danneman coldy watched as Jimi lay vomiting and chocking profusely. We weren't there. She might have seen a trickle of vomit and left the bedroom to make the call to Burdon. Even a 60 second absence from the room would have been enough time for Jimi to vomit profusely in the way he did.
This doesn't mean that I defending the skater from hell in any way, in fact I think she was the cause of Jimi's death, deliberately or not.


Sure, that is possible, but it doesn't make sense. What it would require to accept that scenario would be accepting that whenever Monika did pop back in to the room and saw Jimi covered in vomit that she panicked in girly hysteria and didn't touch him. That doesn't wash. Plus it doesn't fit her story. Her story was she tried to wake Jimi but couldn't, finding small trickle of vomit on his chin. Your childish denier version assumes the privilege of ignoring every single incriminating aspect of this, including Monika's admission to Sharon Lawrence that she washed 'sick' off Jimi with wine - which she obviously never did. So why was Monika making a pained quick excuse for the wine? The reason your entries are inherently self-defeating is because they conspicuously avoid all the necessary involvement of the full facts and accompanying critical analysis. Surely it is deniers who live in the fantasy land here since they show us their arguments can only exist if they universally stay away from the critical evidence and necessary arguments and keep it at the shallow level.

Smarter people will ask what the configuration of the Samarkand basement flat was and see if it was possible Monika strayed from the scene. But even if she did we then have to apply the forensic analysis to see if it was possible for Jimi to have such a profound drug reaction within the critical 2 hour period the evidence establishes. Would Monika Dannemann return from wherever she was and find Jimi in extremis covered in vomit and just stand there drooling? I don't think she would. Clever people would see Monika made a pained quick excuse for the wine to Sharon Lawrence. Monika needed to think of something quick so she told Sharon she washed sick off Jimi's face with wine. Monika was obviously making an excuse for the wine she couldn't explain. If we observe the condition Jimi was in there was obviously no real effort to clear any vomit off him. So why did Monika make such a pained and stressed excuse for the wine? Was it because she was forced to sit there and watch Jimi Hendrix being murdered by waterboarding with wine? Again, smart people would say to themselves "Gee, now if Monika knew Jimi was dead and murdered she might just leave him there untouched like he was." This fits the evidence. Monika standing there drooling while Jimi choked to death in a volcano of vomit doesn't make sense however.

Sharon Lawrence was clued about some unusual wine to the point that she made inquiries about it to Monika. Monika exposed herself by reacting painfully to a question she hadn't expected to ever be asked. She further exposed herself by making up a quick excuse that once again didn't match the known facts. You can't fake painful moans and whines and then abruptly changing the subject to avoid the matter. Those are gut reactions that detectives usually sieze on as signs of guilt. This then fits an entire chain evidence beyond this.

You can either force this into the coloring book/troll version to make cheap excuses work or you can intelligently process the full body of evidence and where it leads. That evidence doesn't suggest an accidental death, and deniers achieve their position only by categorically denying every single aspect of the incriminating evidence, including doctor's witnessings, forensics, and even confessions...

Fenders Fingers
06-26-11, 03:28 PM
What I am tired of here is the "I'm right and your wrong" attitude. Followed by the snide comments that one seems to think supports ones point.
Quite frankly I amtired of reading it over and fucking over.
Now if we don't get a sea change here I am closing both threads, at least until I have regained the will ti live.

Make your points without dis'ing other members.

purple jim
06-26-11, 03:41 PM
Would Monika Dannemann return from wherever she was and find Jimi in extremis covered in vomit and just stand there drooling? I don't think she would.

YOU don't think so because you are a smart person. I'm just a regular thicko and I think it is possible that she just freaked out, panicked, got the frigging fright of her life, like a rabbit frozen in the headlights of the situation. Her pathetic panic stricken calls to Burdon bear witness to this. "Call the fucking ambulance" he screamed, to no avail. Because she just dithered in terror at what had happenned (at what she had done?) Eric realised that he just had to leg it round there himself. It's plausible... for us happy trolls.

Scrum Drum
06-26-11, 03:56 PM
You've got it all wrong there. Clapton has said that he saw Jimi that night but didn't go over to meet him. So he wouldn't have seen what he was drinking.





Hendrix played right-handed guitars upside down. While browsing through some instrument shops in the West End, Clapton found a white, left-handed Stratocaster and bought it for Hendrix. Clapton took the guitar to a Sly and the Family Stone concert at the Lyceum that night, expecting to see Jimi and give him the guitar. But Hendrix never showed up.

“The next day, I heard that he had died,” Clapton writes. “He had passed out, stoned on a mixture of booze and drugs, and choked on his own vomit. It was the first time the death of another musician really affected me. We had all felt obliterated when Buddy Holly died, but this was much more personal. I was incredibly upset and very angry, and was filled with a feeling of terrible loneliness.”



The quote above is from an internet article about Clapton's biography. This doesn't sound to me like Clapton saw Jimi that night.


Again, do you honestly think Clapton would forget to mention he saw Jimi at the Scotch that night?

pederpropell
06-26-11, 04:06 PM
I am really amazed... reading this mess..! Months after month..I have worked in the emergency room for more than 15 years, and total 20 years as a nurse/anaestesian. I`ve seen many who died just like Jimi, I`ve seen people DOA - covered in vomit that was black and ugly "tons of it".. This was people that didnt drink redwine but other kind of alcohol, beer/liqour, mixed with drugs...food..lack of sleep.. You name it. They die!! This is no exact science!! Every case are individual.
There is no way Jimi was killed! He died from spupid decisions (his own) and his death was a tragedy - just the same way as 1000 other individuals in UK in 1970! That was the amount that was drowning in alcohol / drugs in UK alone that year.

Scum Drum; you don`t know shit about reality= ReaL Life!! You know what? I guess you don`t know anything about Jimis music! Prove me wrong!! You`re only one of these crazy conspiratory guys, they are all over the net. Jimis memory doesn`t need you!!

This is all from me on the matter as english isn`t my #1 language. Last; Jimi Hendrix is about joy and life - not death and conspiratic bullshit!!! But I know you are beyond sanety...

Pederpropell

Scrum Drum
06-26-11, 04:10 PM
YOU don't think so because you are a smart person. I'm just a regular thicko and I think it is possible that she just freaked out, panicked, got the frigging fright of her life, like a rabbit frozen in the headlights of the situation. Her pathetic panic stricken calls to Burdon bear witness to this. "Call the fucking ambulance" he screamed, to no avail. Because she just dithered in terror at what had happenned (at what she had done?) Eric realised that he just had to leg it round there himself. It's plausible... for us happy trolls.


Focusing on just one one weak narrow excuse while once again ignoring all the other evidence only proves my points. You've ignored the totality of the evidence and arguments in order to hide behind weak contrivances that are being used to avoid the main arguments. Only arrogance or plain intellectual dishonesty would allow you to do that and think you were getting away with it. The form of your arguments gives you away. Monika could just as easily done that if she were forced to watch Jimi being murdered and didn't know what to do afterwards.

If we deal in the real world we then go back out of these cartoon analyses and look at the forensic evidence which shows the wine can't be explained. Monika would not have made such painful noises to Sharon Lawrence when asked about the wine if it didn't have painful associations with it. When you ignore my wine arguments you give yourself away. The wine keeps coming up, as do your evasions of it. Since the wine keeps appearing that means Bannister's witnessing of it is very likely. And once we reasonably establish the wine, the forensic arguments proving murder reasonably apply.

Sorry, your arguments don't cut the reality here. They're just obvious, transparent cheap excuses to get around the evidence you refuse to honestly acknowledge or confront.

Scrum Drum
06-26-11, 04:41 PM
There is no way Jimi was killed! He died from spupid decisions (his own) and his death was a tragedy - just the same way as 1000 other individuals in UK in 1970! That was the amount that was drowning in alcohol / drugs in UK alone that year.

Scum Drum; you don`t know shit about reality= ReaL Life!! You know what? I guess you don`t know anything about Jimis music! Prove me wrong!! You`re only one of these crazy conspiratory guys, they are all over the net. Jimis memory doesn`t need you!!

This is all from me on the matter as english isn`t my #1 language. Last; Jimi Hendrix is about joy and life - not death and conspiratic bullshit!!! But I know you are beyond sanety...

Pederpropell


I'm glad Pederpropell has shown-up to offer us her attempt at trying to use her professional occupation as a nurse to force a rather primitive, overly-general argument against the evidence. Smart people will see Pederpropell's arguments are too general to be useful towards the level of evidence we've established. It is an attempt to get me to respond to this underdeveloped level of argument, however smart people will once again see that Pederpropell, like all deniers, hasn't come anywhere near answering the operative points here. That seems to be a regular pattern with deniers. Pederpropell's method seems to be calling the evidence "conspiracy theory" and then ignoring it in order to force this simple argument without ever touching the facts. Its form alone is disqualifying according to the level we've already reached. Smart people will see that it isn't me who's failed to answer the points, but her. I wouldn't bother to answer this because it is so lacking in credible content that it isn't worth answering. I just wanted to point-out that although deniers pose themselves as possessing an unquestionable superior position they universally can't answer basic points about Jimi's death. We see that once again. Pederpropell's post is a mockery of itself and ignores some very credible evidence and motives.

If Pederpropell possessed the medical professional credibility she implies she would recognize the forensic evidence involving the wine. A credible medical professional would acknowledge that Jimi couldn't have "bottles worth" of wine in his lungs at the same time he only possessed a 5mg/100ml blood alcohol content. Pederpropell allows herself the privilege of ignoring this because she simply deals with it by blustering Jimi was a typical drug irresponsibility overdose over everything. Not very clever. Pederpropell simply shouts "Jimi was not killed!" while ignoring all the evidence that shows he was.

dino77
06-26-11, 04:47 PM
I'm glad Pederpropell has shown-up to offer us her attempt at trying to use her professional occupation as a nurse to force a rather primitive, overly-general argument against the evidence.

Don't think Peder is a she, it's male name. Nurses can be male also, you know...

MourningStar
06-26-11, 04:52 PM
What I am tired of here is the "I'm right and your wrong" attitude. Followed by the snide comments that one seems to think supports ones point.
Quite frankly I amtired of reading it over and fucking over.
Now if we don't get a sea change here I am closing both threads, at least until I have regained the will ti live.

Make your points without dis'ing other members.don't do a damn thing! Pat specially created this forum and moved these topics here from the forums where normal people frequent. If you are exhausted from all this then it is as simple as not opening this topic. I guarantee you there will be no 'sea change' in this or any other conspiracy thread. The site has a ton of moderators that will step in should it be required. You should know that this kind of communication is par for the course when the subject is religion, politics, or in this case, conspiracy. Pat started this, he, not you (w/o his permission anyway), should be the one to end it.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

Fenders Fingers
06-26-11, 05:01 PM
don't do a damn thing! Pat specially created this forum and moved these topics here from the forums where normal people frequent. If you are exhausted from all this then it is as simple as not opening this topic. I guarantee you there will be no 'sea change' in this or any other conspiracy thread. The site has a ton of moderators that will step in should it be required. You should know that this kind of communication is par for the course when the subject is religion, politics, or in this case, conspiracy. Pat started this, he, not you (w/o his permission anyway), should be the one to end it.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

Pat can close this thread any time he wants. As I can.
Yes I'm tired of all the shit here but as a mod I have to check in, end of.
Now, for the VERY LAST TIME TO ALL OF YOU. Read the forum rules. If anyone has issue with them feel free to post Pat or any of the mods.
End of discussion.

purple jim
06-26-11, 05:09 PM
If we deal in the real world we then go back out of these cartoon analyses and look at the forensic evidence which shows the wine can't be explained.

He just doesn't get it does he?
Bye bye.

MourningStar
06-26-11, 05:17 PM
Pat can close this thread any time he wants.yes he can, but so far he has not.



As I can.no doubt.



... as a mod I have to check in, end of.as do the ton of other mods here. so far, no beef outta them, ey?



I suggest we poll the membership. My hope would be that the majority would vote that this forum be dismantled and that SD or stplsd or purple jim or any other party 'into this' start their own Hendrix conspiracy blog. I'm sure Pat would allow a link to it be posted in our External Links Forum.

stplsd
06-26-11, 05:41 PM
[ Eric realised that he just had to leg it round there himself.

That's a point, Eric or Alvinia (can't remember) said he just went back to sleep. It was Alvinia that went to the flat, only arriving when the ambulance was leaving. There's several versions.

stplsd
06-26-11, 09:01 PM
The quote above is from an internet article about Clapton's biography. This doesn't sound to me like Clapton saw Jimi that night.

It's already been pointed out.

stplsd
06-26-11, 09:20 PM
And BTW, can't we just start a "MD-Witch Hunt"-thread or a "Witchhunter General"-thread

There's already three or more on the go as it is;)

stplsd
06-26-11, 09:21 PM
I can see it now. The year is 2081 and Jimi fans are debating how this thread died.

No need for a "debate", it was dead before it started;)

stplsd
06-26-11, 09:27 PM
If Pederpropell possessed the medical professional credibility she implies she would recognize . . .

. . . that Bannister's story is nothing more than a stark staringly obvious, deceitful and inept attempt by Bannister to cover his arse over a further charge of malpractice on top of the several he was already facing at the time (not to menton the fraud, which was seen by the first and succeeding tribunals as serious enough for him to have been struck off the medical register permanently, despite his several attempts over the years to be re-instated)

stplsd
06-26-11, 09:33 PM
If we deal in the real world we then go back out of these cartoon analyses and look at the forensic evidence which shows . . .

. . . that Bannister's wine story can easily be explained as nothing more than a stark staringly obvious, deceitful and inept attempt by Bannister to cover his arse over a further charge of malpractice on top of the several he was already facing at the time (not to menton the fraud, which was seen by the first and succeeding tribunals as serious enough for him to have been struck off the medical register permanently, despite his several attempts over the years to be re-instated)


"Sorry" SD but . . .
. . . your arguments don't cut the reality here. They're just obvious, transparent cheap excuses to get around the evidence you refuse to honestly acknowledge or confront.

Ezy Rider
06-26-11, 11:26 PM
Hold your horses pardner, looks like the great Caesar has some new evidence.

Of course I am curious but he hasn't been revealing much, isn't it? And what he has revealed doesn't really jive with what has brought up here. Again, one witness would not prove anything. So many "witnesses" already and they all tell a different story. It is my guess that his main goal is not to prove anything, but only to debunk Tappy's waterboarding conspiracy to the outside press, which is a good thing I think. But if you check the web, the genie is already out off the bottle, and unless CG is going to do press tour, with a lot of web coverage, that genie is not going back in soon.

MourningStar
06-26-11, 11:49 PM
you and your responders are being repetitive to the point of exhaustion. i now admit my error in giving you credit for tenacity. by now, your persistence only reveals your inability to comprehend that your detractors cannot be brought into your camp short of an official acknowledgement by all the agencies you assign ultimate responsibilty. i was wrong in thinking you intelligent enough to realize this. perhaps your life is one of lonliness and CTT is one of a few outlets that can give you some sort of respite. sad. i will now retire to my easy-chair, pop-corn and drink - have a good life.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

You brought as much in to this as you left it with - nothing. Don't sweat it you'll still remain in favor with the care-nots.You are being obtuse, evasive, and presumptuous (you cannot know what others may gather from my droppings :D). Lastly, if you made an effort to pull your head out of this sandbox, your myopic assertion as to my status with the care-nots is rendered invalid.

Scrum Drum
06-27-11, 01:17 AM
Anyone following this would see that we have reached several points of evidence that have been completely ignored by those who don't think Jimi was murdered in lieu of inert material that doesn't make any attempt to respectfully address the point we've reached by means of the material they're ignoring.

You can't get away with trying to ignore all Bannister witnessed by means of the "Tall Man" canard. The 2 bottles of wine Monika claimed to have purchased, along with the two opened bottles of wine the party goers witnessed Jimi leave Cameron's with, were reasonably established as arriving at the Samarkand. This controversy has been publicized reasonably enough that the crew that cleaned-up the flat should have commented on the disposition of the bottles. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that those persons who were documented as being at the Samarkand that morning should have mentioned the status of the bottles by now since it has been more than publicized enough for them to do so of their own volition.

If you study Monika's behaviour she was almost creepy in her cold blooded indifference to Jimi's murder. People like Sharon Lawrence said Monika showed almost no effect from Jimi's death 24 hours after he died in her flat. If you follow her pattern of behavior she was cunningly cool in sticking to her story long after it was pointless to do so. So Monika is an ice queen when it comes to personal composure when telling world class lies. So you have to ask yourself why the sudden sea-change to strong painful emotional whining when Sharon Lawrence mentioned the wine? Monika is unnaturally cool, cunning, and composed when sticking to an obvious cover story. Why then when Sharon Lawrence mentions the word "wine" does Monika react with a series of painful moans and whines and abruptly changes the subject after making-up a quick excuse for the wine? It's literally the only time she ever broke when talking about Jimi's death. Why did that happen when she was asked to explain what happened with the wine? We know Monika didn't clean any 'sick' off Jimi's face with wine because his face was covered in grotesque vomit. So why did Monika lie about the wine?

I guess "getting it" means being publicly unable to answer these questions directly...

Scrum Drum
06-27-11, 01:34 AM
It's already been pointed out.



You're not answering the point. That point is that Steven's story is easily refutable. The English press should have enough knowledge to at least ask Stevens how his account lines-up with the known timeline of Jimi's doings that night. They don't however. This is the classic sign of disinformation ops playing dumb and leading the ignorant to a conclusion they want them to believe. That is, that Jimi was naive and reckless with red wine and it led to his death. This tells you they're trying to head something off. They're trying to cover something up with both Bob Levine's denial and now this out-of-nowhere new account of Jimi being at the Scotch Of St James that night. Both Stevens' and Levine's stories were easily disproven. Why wasn't there any mention of the more than available information to disprove their stories?

Scrum Drum
06-27-11, 01:43 AM
That's a point, Eric or Alvinia (can't remember) said he just went back to sleep. It was Alvinia that went to the flat, only arriving when the ambulance was leaving. There's several versions.


Burdon and the crew were at the flat early on and helped clean it out for hours. It's more important to focus on when Monika first reacted. It had to be somewhere around 5:15am. Since the crew wouldn't have cleaned the flat out for hours while Jimi lay there choking to death it is reasonable to assume he was dead when they got there. And when you realize no one touched the body or cleaned off the vomit - including Monika - it is also reasonable to assume Jimi was dead when Monika first started reaching out for help at 5:15am.

pederpropell
06-27-11, 01:52 AM
I'm glad Pederpropell has shown-up to offer us her attempt at trying to use her professional occupation as a nurse to force a rather primitive, overly-general argument against the evidence. Smart people will see Pederpropell's arguments are too general to be useful towards the level of evidence we've established. It is an attempt to get me to respond to this underdeveloped level of argument, however smart people will once again see that Pederpropell, like all deniers, hasn't come anywhere near answering the operative points here. That seems to be a regular pattern with deniers. Pederpropell's method seems to be calling the evidence "conspiracy theory" and then ignoring it in order to force this simple argument without ever touching the facts. Its form alone is disqualifying according to the level we've already reached. Smart people will see that it isn't me who's failed to answer the points, but her. I wouldn't bother to answer this because it is so lacking in credible content that it isn't worth answering. I just wanted to point-out that although deniers pose themselves as possessing an unquestionable superior position they universally can't answer basic points about Jimi's death. We see that once again. Pederpropell's post is a mockery of itself and ignores some very credible evidence and motives.

If Pederpropell possessed the medical professional credibility she implies she would recognize the forensic evidence involving the wine. A credible medical professional would acknowledge that Jimi couldn't have "bottles worth" of wine in his lungs at the same time he only possessed a 5mg/100ml blood alcohol content. Pederpropell allows herself the privilege of ignoring this because she simply deals with it by blustering Jimi was a typical drug irresponsibility overdose over everything. Not very clever. Pederpropell simply shouts "Jimi was not killed!" while ignoring all the evidence that shows he was.

Scumdrum; one last: -no matter what you are trying to "proove"; the only "proof" "we" (meaning you) have established through countless threads - is that you don`t know shit about Jimi Hendrix life and his music. and that you most likely has a mental disorder. It is obvious the way you write that you are an amateur on the subject. No one who is sane spend months of their short life on a subject like this. What and who are YOU - my old lady - to classify my medical experience, and to diss me?? You don`t know shit about reality and Jimi Hendrix!! You present yourself as some sort of expert and are still reading books that most of us read back years back, searching for "proof" that just isn`t there. What is your background????? Get yourself a life - seriously! You are a disgrace to the memory of Jimi Hendrix! I will not respond to the subject again, so just keep going on - its all in vain. Instead I will enjoy all the other informative post on this great Jimi site!
¨
By the way; you have "established" that I am female. Is this also the way you present "proof"?? You seem to know everything but don`t even get the obvious... I`m a man - at least I try to be.

Pederpropell / Bjørn-Peder

pederpropell
06-27-11, 01:53 AM
Don't think Peder is a she, it's male name. Nurses can be male also, you know...

:jimi:

Scrum Drum
06-27-11, 02:03 AM
Case in point.


You must be able to answer the proven/reasonable points to be able to hang with the big boys in this matter. Watch who dodges the points and veers into ad hominem. It's almost always those who don't believe in the murder. If you can't answer the points about the wine you've simply dismissed yourself from credibility on the topic. Don't people understand that the louder they protest without being able to answer basic arguments the more they expose themselves?

Fenders Fingers
06-27-11, 05:44 AM
I had hoped my previous comments would have been clear enough but not so for some.
So here it is, any issues with what I say keep it out of the thread and PM me.
Some members may well be advised to read the site rules every time they log in. It clearly states that derogatory remakes to other members will not be tolerated. Whatever your opinion on this or any other issue it does not entitle you to name call any other member.
Any such comments I read will be removed (you will not get a PM from me either, pre or post removal). That’s how I’m going to approach this issue as of now throughout the site. The only exception is here in the Jimi Death threads. I don’t know why but these threads have some how appeared to have encourage such a negative attitude from members. With that in mind the next personal comment in such a negative manner will result in both threads being closed. This is not about your opinions and views or even the very fact that going ‘round in circles like a dog chasing its tail'appears to be entertainment to some. So feel free to post and challenge the posts but without intimidating other members. Repeated abuse of the rules does not change that any given member will be dealt with as is stated in the site rules.
Just to reiterate, any issues from any member regards this post, take it to a PM. Any posts relating to this will simply be removed.

Fenders Fingers
06-27-11, 09:34 AM
Also I'll add this.
Posts brought to my attention as being unsuitable will be removed from anywhere on this site as long as they contain any derogitory comments regarding other members.

Please note that I am not going to remove posts that were posted before my "Public Information statement" :-) I have a life and wish to live it folks :-) That said, if you wish to remove any of your own, be my guest folks. :-)

Fenders Fingers
06-27-11, 10:04 AM
............................... for about 5 seconds; then he'd get his guitar and do something better with his time.

Yeah, like come around and decorate my bathroom.
Enough folks. Lets all move on.

Ezy Rider
06-27-11, 10:10 AM
As Dr. Phil always says: start your sentences with "I" and not "you".hug1

MourningStar
06-27-11, 10:33 AM
...Yeah, like come around and decorate my bathroom.good grief!
(the plot thickens)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

Fenders Fingers
06-27-11, 10:41 AM
All "spare" hands welcome :-)

MourningStar
06-27-11, 10:42 AM
All "spare" hands welcome :-)here you go ...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/gdpit_com_63508937_104.gif

Ezy Rider
06-27-11, 11:05 AM
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Scene 5: 'Burn the witch!'
MONKS: [chanting]
Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem.
[bonk]
Pie Iesu domine,...
[bonk]
...dona eis requiem.
[bonk]
Pie Iesu domine,...
[bonk]
...dona eis requiem.
CROWD:
A witch! A witch!
[bonk]
A witch! A witch!
MONKS: [chanting]
Pie Iesu domine...
CROWD:
A witch! A witch! A witch! A witch! We've found a witch! A witch! A witch! A witch! A witch! We've got a witch! A witch! A witch! Burn her! Burn her!
Burn her! We've found a witch! We've found a witch! A witch! A witch! A witch!
VILLAGER #1:
We have found a witch. May we burn her?
CROWD:
Burn her! Burn! Burn her! Burn her!
BEDEVERE:
How do you know she is a witch?
VILLAGER #2:
She looks like one.
CROWD:
Right! Yeah! Yeah!
BEDEVERE:
Bring her forward.
WITCH:
I'm not a witch. I'm not a witch.
BEDEVERE:
Uh, but you are dressed as one.
WITCH:
They dressed me up like this.
CROWD:
Augh, we didn't! We didn't...
WITCH:
And this isn't my nose. It's a false one.
BEDEVERE:
Well?
VILLAGER #1:
Well, we did do the nose.
BEDEVERE:
The nose?
VILLAGER #1:
And the hat, but she is a witch!
VILLAGER #2:
Yeah!
CROWD:
We burn her! Right! Yeaaah! Yeaah!
BEDEVERE:
Did you dress her up like this?
VILLAGER #1:
No!
VILLAGER #2 and 3:
No. No.
VILLAGER #2:
No.
VILLAGER #1:
No.
VILLAGERS #2 and #3:
No.
VILLAGER #1:
Yes.
VILLAGER #2:
Yes.
VILLAGER #1:
Yes. Yeah, a bit.
VILLAGER #3:
A bit.
VILLAGERS #1 and #2:
A bit.
VILLAGER #3:
A bit.
VILLAGER #1:
She has got a wart.
RANDOM:
[cough]
BEDEVERE:
What makes you think she is a witch?
VILLAGER #3:
Well, she turned me into a newt.
BEDEVERE:
A newt?
VILLAGER #3:
I got better.
VILLAGER #2:
Burn her anyway!
VILLAGER #1:
Burn!
CROWD:
Burn her! Burn! Burn her!...
BEDEVERE:
Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
VILLAGER #1:
Are there?
VILLAGER #2:
Ah?
VILLAGER #1:
What are they?
CROWD:
Tell us! Tell us!...
VILLAGER #2:
Do they hurt?
BEDEVERE:
Tell me. What do you do with witches?
VILLAGER #2:
Burn!
VILLAGER #1:
Burn!
CROWD:
Burn! Burn them up! Burn!...
BEDEVERE:
And what do you burn apart from witches?
VILLAGER #1:
More witches!
VILLAGER #3:
Shh!
VILLAGER #2:
Wood!
BEDEVERE:
So, why do witches burn?
[pause]
VILLAGER #3:
B--... 'cause they're made of... wood?
BEDEVERE:
Good! Heh heh.
CROWD:
Oh, yeah. Oh.
BEDEVERE:
So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
VILLAGER #1:
Build a bridge out of her.
BEDEVERE:
Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?
VILLAGER #1:
Oh, yeah.
RANDOM:
Oh, yeah. True. Uhh...
BEDEVERE:
Does wood sink in water?
VILLAGER #1:
No. No.
VILLAGER #2:
No, it floats! It floats!
VILLAGER #1:
Throw her into the pond!
CROWD:
The pond! Throw her into the pond!
BEDEVERE:
What also floats in water?
VILLAGER #1:
Bread!
VILLAGER #2:
Apples!
VILLAGER #3:
Uh, very small rocks!
VILLAGER #1:
Cider!
VILLAGER #2:
Uh, gra-- gravy!
VILLAGER #1:
Cherries!
VILLAGER #2:
Mud!
VILLAGER #3:
Uh, churches! Churches!
VILLAGER #2:
Lead! Lead!
ARTHUR:
A duck!
CROWD:
Oooh.
BEDEVERE:
Exactly. So, logically...
VILLAGER #1:
If... she... weighs... the same as a duck,... she's made of wood.
BEDEVERE:
And therefore?
VILLAGER #2:
A witch!
VILLAGER #1:
A witch!
CROWD:
A witch! A witch!...
VILLAGER #4:
Here is a duck. Use this duck.
[quack quack quack]
BEDEVERE:
Very good. We shall use my largest scales.
CROWD:
Ohh! Ohh! Burn the witch! Burn the witch! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Ahh! Ahh...
BEDEVERE:
Right. Remove the supports!
[whop]
[clunk]
[creak]
CROWD:
A witch! A witch! A witch!
WITCH:
It's a fair cop.
VILLAGER #3:
Burn her!
CROWD:
Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn! Burn!...
BEDEVERE:
Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?
ARTHUR:
I am Arthur, King of the Britons.

MourningStar
06-27-11, 11:58 AM
... Yes I'm tired of all the shit here but as a mod I have to check in, ....yes, but you also have to sleep eventually, and then ....
.... mwaha-ha-ha-ha-ha ....
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/AVATAR/demon_e0.gif

Scrum Drum
06-27-11, 12:46 PM
Fender Fingers is absolutely right.

All this insulting and name calling is a bunch of bs. We'll NEVER KNOW what happened 9/18/70. That's one FACT we all can agree upon.

Getting all bent out of shape about the different theories isn't much different than doing so over which song is better than another. A complete waste of energy.

If the Man himself read this he'd think we're a bunch of no-life clowns...for about 5 seconds; then he'd get his guitar and do something better with his time.



This is provably untrue. If we looked at how far this has come since Etchingham's petition a lot has been learned since the everyone-believed-Monika's-story days. In 2009 we even had an admission of a direct murder confession by Jeffery. I understand some people might not be of the personal inclination to apply advanced investigation analysis on this matter. However people with a better understanding of the subject would know the evidence gives us strong reason to believe there are living people out there with serious knowledge of what really happened. Also, if you have a very advanced understanding of the evidence itself there are medical forensic formulas that have never been processed by any credible authority to this day. They are still viable because they were locked-in to the autopsy data at the time of Jimi's death. People with their eye on the right place would see the British Government has made efforts to desperately avoid formally processing this evidence. Scotland Yard even lied to get around re-opening the case (they said Monika's story was true). So without insulting anyone or making personal remarks perhaps the best people to judge this are not ordinary Hendrix fans. The evidence is at the level where it needs to be handled by experts familiar with this kind of thing. Sorry, it might be favorable to people who don't possess the necessary inclination to "move on" and feel good however the evidence doesn't allow that. This should be obvious enough from the opposition being publicly unable to answer some very clear and easily understandable points. I'm not sure what the rules on neutrality are in this matter. After all it is on-topic in a branch labelled "Conspiracy Theory" to discuss this. It is off-topic to try to intimidate people off of it. I think we all know why this is happening and it ain't because the opposition was able to directly answer reasonable points.

MourningStar
06-27-11, 01:04 PM
SD - you have provided data in support of your position ad nauseum. Your opponents have done likewise. Stalemate. Only an acknowledgement of complicity from the official agencies you assign responsibility to the death of Hendrix can turn the tide in the direction you travel. Plain and simple.

stplsd
06-27-11, 09:19 PM
Just to make it a little clearer as to the official verdict: "He died as a result of inhalation of vomit due to barbiturate intoxication." ie He choked to death on inhaled vomit due to the barbiturate intoxication preventing his cough reflex from clearing his lungs.
8226

MourningStar
06-27-11, 11:18 PM
... preventing his cough reflex from clearing his lungs.That statement is not in the report or in any of the texts I have seen but it is clinically correct. However, is it not possible that the barbituate intoxication was strong enough to have rendered a cough reflex (or any reflex for that matter) non-existent? Perhaps there was just a small enough spark to account for Monika's "I seen he had been a little sick" or some-such similar statement as I recall. Don't have that quote handy at the moment, but the picture conveyed by her was one of extremely minimal vomit. Since the bac has been determined to have been non-lethal Hendrix would have vomited himself awake. (were it not for the barbs, that is)

stplsd
06-28-11, 03:18 AM
That statement is not in the report or in any of the texts I have seen but it is clinically correct.
This is also a short summation of the coroner's verdict, although a little bit fuller than the previous, that's why I added an explanation to show what is clearly intended, but obviously not clearly enough for everyone. As with the more abbreviated death certificate which left out the "due to" but which was clearly implied in the order it was written. Doctors are notorious for their abbreviation, which even extends to many writing in an illegible shorthand like scrawl.

However, is it not possible that the barbituate intoxication was strong enough to have rendered a cough reflex (or any reflex for that matter) non-existent?
We know that his cough reflex was impaired enough for him to choke to death on his vomit and that he vomited which is another reflex action. This is an all too common occurence unfortunately, usually involving alcohol. The word "possible" does not apply. The bit in brackets does not apply either as he vomited, which is a reflex action. Are you attempting to suggest that it's unlikely that one can can vomit and yet have an impaired cough reflex, or what?

Perhaps there was just a small enough spark to account for Monika's "I seen he had been a little sick" or some-such similar statement as I recall. Don't have that quote handy at the moment, but the picture conveyed by her was one of extremely minimal vomit.
That was obviously just her tidying up the death scene for Jimi's public in the press, ie trying to make it sound a wee bit more dignified.
Her actual statement given to sergeant John Shaw and PC Upton, for which she would have been cautioned, and which was given in evidence at the coroner's court, where she was under oath, was: "When I woke up at eleven his face was covered in vomit and he was breathing noisily. I sent for an ambulance and he was taken to hospital."
In a later statement to the Coroner's Office she repeated that "his face was covered in vomit"
Then at the actual inquest she did not mention vomit, probably not neccessary as two statements had already gleaned that he had vomited, and that the immediate cause of death was inhalation of vomit.


Since the bac has been determined to have been non-lethal
Non-lethal? Where did that come from?:)
The "autopsy" showed there was not very much alcohol in his system when he died


Hendrix would have vomited himself awake. (were it not for the barbs, that is)
I'll save time:
If he had not vomited, or inhaled such a quantity of vomit (although the barbs were very likely the cause of him vomiting, I would imagine) he may well have survived that amount of barbiturates according to the literature. ie It was not a neccessarily lethal overdose, although it appears the dose had already been digested, it would have still been a possibility for him to survive, especially if treated in time. In the same way, if Bon Scott hadn't inhaled such a quantity of vomit he may well have survived the amount of alcohol he had taken. The distinction between what would be an overwhelmingly fatal overdose and one that is not neccessarily so is an important indicator of intent. This large but not neccessarily fatal overdose was quite possibly part of Thurston's reasoning for not declaring suicide. If he had taken a much larger overdose he may have. But then without a suicide note, or other corroberating testimony eg that he was severely depressed, had overwhelming business worries etc., Thurston would likely have still declared an open verdict anyway (if his verdict on Keith Moon is anything to go by - ~ 32! Hemineverin pills - Thurston's interpretation of English law doesn't appear to have neccessarily considered the quantity taken on it's own as being a safe determining factor of intent. I imagine, though, that if an autopsy clearly showed that someone had swallowed a very large amount in one go, he might have declared suicide.)

Tuesday 29 September 1970
UK
DAILY MAIL
Westminster coroner Dr Gavin Thurston recorded an open verdict on the 27-year-old American 'wild man of pop, because of insufficient evidence.
He said the only indication of suicide was that Hendrix had taken an excessive number of tablets.
"But I don't feel it would be safe to regard this on its own as evidence of deliberate inten­tion to take his own life," he said.

The above quote from the coroner's court shows clearly that Thurston had ruled out any possibility of a 2nd party being actively involved in contributing his death.
As the amount Hendrix had taken gave rise to suspicion that it may have been suicide, his only concern then became whether there was enough evidence to declare suicide.

Ezy Rider
06-28-11, 03:50 AM
Thanks for the coroner's report. It strangely says "died at the hospital" from the inhalation of vomit "sustained at 12:45 PM".

Didn't we read over and over he was already DOA, had dried up vomit blocking his throat, calls to EB, friends coming over cleaning the place, and only after that the arrival of the ambulance?

stplsd
06-28-11, 03:53 AM
^
Nice observaton.
It's a formality, not a life or death situation in an emergency room. The time given was quite probably the time when whoever wrote out the declaration at the hospital, not neccessarily the actual time when the doctors decided he was unsaveable and stopped working on him, which appears to have been almost as soon as they first checked him over at the hospital ie technically, DOA. It's odd that we frequently read of this and that time being debated but I can't recall this official TOD being referred to by anyone involved in claiming/questioning what actually happened. ie It's usually just the Doctors and ambulance men's word against Monika's. The time given on the record which supports her contention that he was still alive (although only just due to the ambulance men's negligence) when he arrived at the hospital is not mentioned. She also accused the Doctor in charge of negligence in not performing a tracheotomy. On becoming aware of her accusation, in 1992, he countered by claiming that masses of red wine ruled this out as a possibility and that he had already "drowned" (an emotive term usually only associated with immersion, not regurgitation) in it (ie was dead) long before he reached the hospital, oddly further attempting to clear himself by claiming "they" worked on this long dead body for half an hour (this official TOD, which he would obviosly know of, gave him space to make this claim), sucking out masses of red wine in an attempt to resurrect it! (ie re-inforce his alibi)
By Dr. Brown's account casualty appears to have been busy, quite probably all hands were needed at that point and they left the paper work til later. It certainly let's the ambulance men off the hook, to a degree, officially;)

The stuff about "friends" being in the flat prior to the ambulance arriving is based on a couple of very dodgy statements/claims and relies too heavily on conflicting estimates of time given (apparently casually, without much thought to the exact accuracy) many years later and conflicting claims/statements. A close look at the motives behind several of these statements, often only claimed 2nd hand (ie only "reported") without corroberation and at the context in which they were made/reported, ie Kathy & Monika's defamation court battles, makes them even more dubious. None of these "witnesses" have had their stories tested in a court of law, or have made legally binding statements on this - nor are they likely to as no-one is that interested it seems.

Ezy Rider
06-28-11, 05:35 AM
“died at the hospital" in my books means still alive before arriving at the hospital. It doesn't say "pronounced dead". A very shoddy report.

There isn't much in here that makes any sense, and it seems that they all are trying to put to blame on somebody else (MD, ambulance men, Bannister/casualty personal) even though it looks like that they all had their part in what must be a very unfortunate string of events (from the nine pills to the hospital ward) that could have been prevented at any stage but wasn't. Big, big sigh.

stplsd
06-28-11, 06:53 AM
^
It's not neccessarily a "shoddy" report, we've not seen a full report of the court proceedings, this is just the "Coroner's Verdict" "notes of evidence taken by the coroner at the inquest" (the previous photo copy posted by Rupe is just the "Death Certificate") ie all that he considered of note: who the guy was, where he lived, where he was treated, an official TOD, his verdict and the barest summation of his reason for it. Much as we've yet to see the details of any police investigation, been party to the various discussions they had. The actual pathologist's report, the details of his notes, what was discussed between the pathologist, the police, the coroner and I would imagine, quite possibly the doctor responsible for Hendrix' treatment at the time? Not to mention the unexplained, so far, apparently huge discrepancy in the "autopsy transcript" between the blood alcohol at 5mg% (looks like a zero might be missing? or the blood was not in sufficient condition to get a reasonably accurate level, his words "failed to reveal more than" hint at this. DD A/B level is 80mg%), the urine alcohol at 46mg (the % is oddly not there, which begs the question 100mg in proportion to what? - DD U/A level is 107mg% by-the-way SD;) ) and Teare's reported 100mg ( we are, again, left to presume %) estimate for the blood alcohol at the time of taking the tablets. It does appear that he used the very much higher urine level to calculate his estimate. The time of death on this very brief summation seems to have come from the hospital. If it did he may not have seen a good reason for changing the time to some other the pathologist may have determined as he didn't see this as having a sufficient bearing on the case, given what he had already determined, to go to that trouble. Perhaps it is the time of death established by the pathologist? That would be very interesting, rice grains still discernable in the stomach ~ 9 hours or more after Stella's reported ~ 03:00 'last supper' (which included rice) at Kameron's party, but "only" ~ 4 after Monika's ~ 07:00 'bread & fish' (some red wine?) 'last supper' (interesting Jesus symbolism I never thought about before) ;) After their investigations no one involved in the case was suspicious of foul play or were made aware of anyone else being suspicious (beyond a possible suicide that is). If indeed anyone was, there is no record/claim of/from anyone reporting such a suspicion to the police. So what did it matter. The case was done and dusted, everyone concerned was apparently satisfied with the verdict, apart from Burdon who thought it was suicide.

The "Coroner's Inquisition" document gives the same details as the above "Coroner's Verdict", but cause of death is abbreviated as in the "Death Certificate."

Ezy Rider
06-28-11, 09:19 AM
^
everyone concerned was apparently satisfied with the result.

The more reason to assume that all involved were to some extent responsible.

how many "reports" are there anyway? If they are all this contradictory, terse in content and detail, or even careless, it is still a long, long way to get an understanding what has happened. How many reports would have been written and by whom in a comparable case at that time?

stplsd
06-28-11, 10:12 AM
^
I would imagine, and have been told there is or was an official record taken of the proceedings, as in any legal court. Journalists were apparently admitted or were given access to the this, as they have given verbatim quotes, such as the Daily Mail one I posted. Tony Brown gives a verbatim quote from the inquest, but unfortunately neglected to say where he got it.

Don't know how anyone can be responsible for a grown man who is compos mentis, by all accounts very experienced with drugs, including downers, who then took a large overdose which ended up killing him. Monika may have dithered by phoning Alvinia but not by much, she was a foreigner, who had only stayed in the UK briefly, was quite likely stoned, worried and shocked. The ambulance men may have been negligent to a degree, as Monika claims but it's very unlikely that they would have performed anywhere near as badly as Monika makes out (if indeed she was even there or in the ambulance), we cannot with any decency accept her sole word for this. It's totally unfair to those two men. Monika and therefore Bannister, in his desperation (without Monika's accusations there would be no Bannister) are the only ones who thought they stood to gain from their comments, the rest not surprisingly were reluctant to speak as it's not the done thing to breach patient confidentiality, and could lead to dismissal or even the court.
And it's not like he'd been run over, or he had a disease, or been attacked for no reason.
It's obviously too "uncomfortable" for some fans to accept that their "hero" may have been less than "perfect" in every way and look around for someone to blame.
But he took an overdose of tablets, it was his choice, quite possibly the large amount was "accidental" to a degree, but he would still have needed to take an overdose to start with - two or more. Same as Lambert, Moon & Entwistle, Bon Scott etc. etc. ad infinitum. Not that I'm not sympathetic, or even lucky not have ended up the same way, but sometimes you have to accept responsibility for your own actions/shit happens. It's not always someone else's fault. Is the teenager who works the cash register in the supermarket to blame for selling booze to someone that DD who then dies crashing their car due to that booze? Or the guy that leaves a bottle of very strong spirits out and a guest tans too much, too quickly and dies choking on his vomit in his "sleep"? I would say no.

Ezy Rider
06-28-11, 10:49 AM
Going into all the possible motivations is too complicated without a given set of proven facts. I don't think we have arrived at that point yet, and probably will never be (without all the reports disclosed, all interviews organised to date, new witnesses heard etc).

At the moment, I just see a whole series of unfortunate events in which many people screwed up. I am not denying Jimi any responsibility for his own doing (if he was aware of it, that is), and everybody has his or her flaws, but I am neither going to heap all responsibility on his shoulders alone. Again, there is no way of telling and the situation is apparently far too complicated to come to any conclusions on the present facts alone.

What bugs me the most at present however, is the realisation that Jimi's death was not inevitable and could have been prevented. What a shame!

stplsd
06-28-11, 11:06 AM
^
Life's not a series of nice facts, it's messy. "A series of unfortunate events" I like it. I don't know if we're qualified to say anyone screwed up particularly given what little reliable info there is, apart fom Jimi, he certainly did.


What bugs me the most at present however, is the realisation that Jimi's death was not inevitable and could have been prevented. What a shame!

You think so:


An Appointment in Samarkand

“The disciple of a Sufi of Baghdad was sitting in the corner of an inn one day when he heard two figures

talking. From what they said he realized that one of them was the Angel of Death.
‘I have several calls to make in this city during the next three weeks,’ the Angel was saying to his companion.
Terrified, the disciple concealed himself until the two had left. Then, applying his intelligence to the problem of how to cheat a possible call from death, he decided that if he kept away from Baghdad he should not be touched. From this reasoning it was but a short step to hiring the fastest horse available and spurring it night and day towards the distant town of Samarkand.
Meanwhile Death met the Sufi teacher and they talked about various people. ‘And where is your disciple so-and-so?’ asked Death.
‘He should be somewhere in this city, spending his time in contemplation, perhaps in caravanserai,’ said the teacher.
‘Surprising,’ said the Angel; ‘because he is on my list. Yes, here it is: I have to collect him in four weeks’ time at Samarkand, of all places.


I would say it was tragic.

MourningStar
06-28-11, 02:00 PM
We know that his cough reflex was impaired enough for him to choke to death on his vomit and that he vomited which is another reflex action. This is an all too common occurence unfortunately, usually involving alcohol. The word "possible" does not apply. The bit in brackets does not apply either as he vomited, which is a reflex action. Are you attempting to suggest that it's unlikely that one can can vomit and yet have an impaired cough reflex, or what? ... After 'sleeping' on this, my remark was not complete. I was, at the time, reflecting on my teen years when, for a short time, doing downers was 'in' and I was reflecting how these little monsters would put me in a state of total immobility. I know now that I did in fact maintain at least two reflexes, breathing (w/accompanying metabolic activity) and something akin to conciousness, though not much more than these. I suppose that the amount of barbituate ingestion necessary to render any reflex non-existent would be of a quantity sufficient to stop the heart or all breathing or both. Since the presence of vomit is undisputed, it is without question that there was reflex activity.

kdion11
06-28-11, 03:13 PM
SD - you have provided data in support of your position ad nauseum. Your opponents have done likewise. Stalemate. Only an acknowledgement of complicity from the official agencies you assign responsibility to the death of Hendrix can turn the tide in the direction you travel. Plain and simple.



KD: Bingo. Sounds like a confirmation of the original "Open Verdict"

Ezy Rider
06-29-11, 12:03 AM
You think so:


Or how about this:

"Happy New Year first of all"
[guitar: plink-ploink]
"and I hope you have about a million or two million more of ‘em . . . if we can get over this summer nyeh-heh-heh."

Eerie!

update: edited with the correct words

stplsd
06-29-11, 05:18 AM
it is without question that there was reflex activity.

But, tragically, not quite enough

dino77
06-29-11, 05:20 AM
Or how about this:

"Happy New Year everybody!"
[guitar: plink-ploink]
"There will one or two million more to come ... That is if we can get over this Summer. Heh-heh."

Eerie!


Yep, I always think about this whenever I listen to BOG... Well, he did get over the summer, but just barely.

stplsd
06-29-11, 05:22 AM
Yep, I always think about this whenever I listen to BOG... Well, he did get over the summer, but just barely.

Just in time for 'the fall' and a 'last supper' of 'loaves and fishes' with red wine (just a little) .
Leaving behind a last song:

(slow)

The story of Jesus
so easy to explain
After they crucified him,
a woman, she claimed his name
The story of Jesus
the whole bible knows
went all across the desert
and in the middle, he found a rose

There should be no questions
there should be no lies
He was married ever happily after
For all the tears we cry
No use in arguing
all the use to the man that moans
When each man falls in battle,
his soul it has to roam
Angels of heaven
flying saucers to some,
made Easter Sunday
the name of the Rising Sun

The story is written
by so many people who dared,
to lay down the truth
to so very many who cared
to carry the cross
of Jesus and beyond
We will guild the light
this time with a woman in our arms
We as men
can't explain the reason why
the woman's always mentioned
at the moment that we die
All we know
is God is by our side,

and he says the word
so easy yet so hard
I wish not to be alone,
so I must respect my other heart
Oh, the story
of Jesus is the story
of you and me
No use in feeling lonely,
I am you searching to be free

The story
of life is quicker
than the wink of an eye
The story of love
is hello and goodbye
Until we meet again

stplsd
06-29-11, 11:13 AM
Eerie!

DAILY MIRROR 11 January 1969

Jimi says: “People still mourn when people die. That’s self-sympathy. The person who is dead ain’t cryin’.
“When I die I want people to play my music, go wild and freak out an’ do anything they wanna do . . .”
Obviously Jimi Hendrix won't need a plaque for any of us to remember him by.

1969 SIPPIN’ TIME, SIPPIN’ WINE (Slow blues)

Drown in wine
Am I drowning in love?
I see that word fly by
Written in the clouds above

Drown in wine
Can’t be late for the show
I see love fly by
Written in the clouds below

19:30, Thursday 1 January 1970, Fillmore East, New York City
Machine Gun

"Happy New Year first of all and I hope you have about a million or two million more
of ‘em, if we can get over this summer nyeh-heh-heh"

Earth Blues, Berkeley rehearsal

You better ride on, right to the summer

Don’t you think love is the answer, baby
Lord, you better hope it comes before the summer, baby

Voodoo Chile (SR) Berkeley 1st show

We hope to see you soon, very soon, before the summer comes.


July 1970 Seabury Hall

I’m laying there playin’ the part and a grape chokes me, almost, but I can’t let the choke come out

IOW Voodoo Chile (SR)

I ain’t gonna see you no more in this world

Lord knows, I’m a Voodoo child, what a bore it is

Goteborg 70 Voodoo Chile (SR)

I ain’t gonna see you no more in this world

--------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, pretty eerie

Scrum Drum
06-29-11, 03:14 PM
SD - you have provided data in support of your position ad nauseum. Your opponents have done likewise. Stalemate. Only an acknowledgement of complicity from the official agencies you assign responsibility to the death of Hendrix can turn the tide in the direction you travel. Plain and simple.


No. I see a tendency here to establish a lower understanding of the evidence for the sake of maintaining a status quo consensus. Your post is a good example. What you say is true only if you give equal credit to all arguments. I would contend that I have proven my arguments mainly because the opposition has been unable to answer them in any credible way. The progress of this issue depends on pursuing that which I've outlined. You can see that the side you give credit to for forcing a stalemate was happy not questioning Bob Levine's denial even though it was full of glaring contradictions. Meic Steven's too. Yet the opposition gave it light review. So if you proceed in direction of actually processing the information to establish the facts you'll find that the information is not equal and once processed the evidence I spoke of leads towards incriminating conclusions. Especially the forensic evidence.

No, I have to disagree. If normal means of evidence evaluation were applied the evidence I've discussed would lead to normal prosecution of the case. The fact the authorities have strongly resisted this tells you there's something they're trying to hide. Those that give-up too early in order to come to a status quo acceptance of unprocessed evidence do so at the expense of really finding out what happened and therefore don't offer what can objectively be called a credible side. Sorry.

When you've forced the opposition into being unable to answer reasonable points, as I've done, you don't fall back and concede, you press them for result. That's how it usually works in the same reality Jimi Hendrix was murdered in.

I'm not sure what you're adding there towards the actual points themselves Mourning Star? If we honestly viewed the cross-reference of the wine witnessing we would see it went unanswered. Both murder evidence and arguments for them show an incriminating pattern. That's how these things are done.

Scrum Drum
06-29-11, 03:29 PM
^
The ambulance men may have been negligent to a degree, as Monika claims but it would be very unlikely that they would have performed anywhere near badly as Monika makes out (if indeed she was even there or in the ambulance), we cannot with any decency accept her sole word for this. no.


You have to stay current with the known facts of this case. Terry Slater recently admitted in a British Magazine that he and Monika were at a payphone across the street from the Samarkand when the ambulance arrived. Those who are lax with these facts are only showing their disinterest in seriously evaluating this.

Rupe
06-29-11, 03:42 PM
8277827682758274827182728273

These have as usual come up in the wrong order, but they're numbered.
Don't know if this is available anywhere else.
Also, I don't know how accurate it is. Source: Slightly dubious!

MourningStar
06-29-11, 03:43 PM
... What you say is true only if you give equal credit to all arguments. ...obviously you do not. However, your not giving 'equal credit to all arguments' does not in any way render them invalid. And if, in your mind, those arguments do not meet your criteria of validity, so be it.

Scrum Drum
06-29-11, 04:11 PM
Ah, to understand the evidence you have to pay honest attention to the things the witnesses said. Eric Burdon explained what happened that morning by saying "I just couldn't get myself to go in and look at that mess". He was obviously making an excuse to disinvolve himself from the death scene or any incriminating behaviour or evidence associated with it. Do you believe Eric Burdon was called to the Samarkand Hotel because the world's most famous rock guitarist was in serious trouble and didn't go inside to look at him? Well, Eric was allowed to get away with that without question. Obviously Eric didn't want to involve himself with any explanations. It's obvious that if Burdon didn't see Hendrix he wouldn't have known he was "a mess". Accurate analyses of what happened show that Burdon and the crew spent hours cleaning-up the flat.

Since Jimi was found covered in grotesque amounts of vomit that means the people who cleaned-up didn't clean Jimi up. And since we know Monika finally reached Burdon as early as 5:45am ("and maybe even earlier") that means her panic, shock, and fumble time trying to get in touch with the doctor makes the real first encounter closer to 5:15am. Since Jimi was never touched and no attempt was made to clear any vomit out of his throat, that means he was most likely dead as early as 5:15am. Monika was reacting to a dead Hendrix covered in vomit exactly as he was found. In any case it isn't very believable to suggest the clean-up crew cleaned the flat for hours while Jimi lay choking to death next to them. If you look at some of the casual analyses in this thread you'll see they ignore this and therefore don't exclude it, however reasonable people would assume it very unlikely that Burdon and the crew were Hoovering and feather dusting while Jimi vomited-out profusely next to them. Jimi was dead when Monika first reacted.

Doctor Bannister sucked "bottles worth" of wine from Jimi Hendrix's lungs and body. There are some people trying to casually deny this and defame Bannister but he was there and they weren't. If you put strict analysis to the evidence you'll see strong indication that Bannister was not the only person to witness this wine or speak of it. There are many witnesses that could tell of the status of the wine bottles at the flat but aren't. But Monika's painful reaction to being asked about the wine should be indication enough for those honestly researching this. Monika said she washed Jimi's face with wine but the condition of the body shows us she didn't. Why did she lie about this? You'll see the 'casual' observers never veer into these incriminating clues.

It's kind of obvious that the first arriving responders didn't clear Jimi's throat or try to revive him because they knew there was no reason to. Henderson was wise enough in 1997 to say that those who first arrived must have heard something different than what they told the Inquest. What he is suggesting there is Monika told the first arrivers that Jimi had been murdered just as Tappy described. This fits the evidence and explains why no one tried to help Jimi or revive him. It also explains why they would take so much time to clean-up the flat, not to mention the suspicious indifference of the authorities to obvious clues. It's hard to believe that persons called to assist a struggling Hendrix would arrive and not wipe the vomit off and make some effort at reviving him. Look closely and you'll see the casual observers never make any attempt to answer this.

stplsd
06-29-11, 05:04 PM
Terry Slater recently admitted in a British Magazine that he and Monika were at a payphone across the street from the Samarkand when the ambulance arrived.

Reference? as per your usual unsupported assertions I don't expect one will be forthcoming, or ever;)

MourningStar
06-29-11, 11:12 PM
Reference?The Slater-Dannemann payphone incident is referred in the 1996-Feb issue of Musician, as I vaguely recall. However, that is an American magazine I believe. If someone has it can you please confirm?

-thnx

Scrum Drum
06-30-11, 12:43 AM
Reference? as per your usual unsupported assertions I don't expect one will be forthcoming, or ever;)


I'll try and find it. But you would think that the establishment by the Scotland Yard investigation, spurred by Etchingham, that the call came from the payphone would be strong indication. Hardly "unsupported" for those paying honest attention.

Ezy Rider
06-30-11, 02:09 AM
8277827682758274827182728273

These have as usual come up in the wrong order, but they're numbered.
Don't know if this is available anywhere else.
Also, I don't know how accurate it is. Source: Slightly dubious!

Many thanks Rupe! I believe some excerpts have appeared in publications and therefore sounds reliable.

But what a strange court hearing. It sounds almost rehearsed, similar to the Toronto court hearing: "Did he take drugs? MD: Yes, sleeping tablets which were not strong. They were less strong than mine." (Hint, hint, hint: ACCIDENT!) (how would she know what his sleeping tablets or his drug habits were?) and then the entire hearing continues on proving that everything was normal and not suicide (Hint, hint, hint: ACCIDENT!). If MD says that his pulse and breathing were normally at 11 AM, they don't seem to wonder at all how come he died after that time, where, and how. Then the other "report" says died at the hospital at noon. This would give credence to the sequence of events described by MD (much, much later), were it not that her own stories made over time contradict on so many points. I am not even talking about the undigested "rice" in his stomach (what is the evidence on that? Kathy E.? Autopsy report?). Again, I think the court hearing was more of a formality with which everyone involved could live with. Weird and sad.

stplsd
06-30-11, 03:31 AM
I'll try and find it. But you would think that the establishment by the Scotland Yard investigation, spurred by Etchingham, that the call came from the payphone would be strong indication. Hardly "unsupported" for those paying honest attention.

You are, yet again, just repeating a totally unsupported assertion made by yourself, as usual without a reference that has already been requested I don't expect one from you will be forthcoming, or ever;)

stplsd
06-30-11, 03:58 AM
Also, I don't know how accurate it is. Source: Slightly dubious!

Many thanks Rupe. This sounds very like the doc that did the rounds in the "inner circle" many years ago and is the same (unverified) sheet from which all the biographies appear to have read. Tony mentions it in his book and that he felt it was a bit dodgy (if I remember correctly). Great to have it of course. You are the biz, man, yet again!
The main point of dodginess, I think, is that the renowned English pathologist, in an English court of law, would use an American brand name ie Seconal® and make an artificial distinction between it and the same (unbranded) barbiturate (it's not possible), whereas in the verifiably true documents it is described soley, and correctly as "Barbiturate (quinalbarbitone)" as one would expect and was the normal, correct UK medical description at that time. Of course the source may well be a tabloid journalist, possibly an American? at the court who brought this untenable distinction into the Barbiturate testimony, through a lack of understanding of their unity, or possibly translating the barbiturate as, the more familiar to him, Seconal? Or even possibly an inexperienced court clerk. The atrocious spelling of "Sargent" makes one wonder.
It appears that "memory woman" has also read this, but not too closely and confused MD's statement (on purpose?):
Q : Did he take drugs?
MD: Yes, sleeping tablets which were not strong. They were less strong than mine.

"Memory woman" claims that MD said her tablets "were not strong" and leaves out that Jimi already had a script for sleepers (less strong than MD's)

stplsd
06-30-11, 06:14 AM
But what a strange court hearing. It sounds almost rehearsed,
Not strange, I realise she wasn't on trial, but legal proceedings often are to degree, there is usually an amount of "formula" to the questions and responses. Lawyer (or whoever): "If he asks so-and-so you should reply so-and-so" etc. Don't kid yourselves, it is more a public ritual than a quest for the "TRUTH". Guilty men often walk and innocents go to jail on the strength of a debating point scored or lost - frequently due to how "good" a lawyer you can afford (money doesn't talk, it swears). "Innocent until proven guilty" & "Beyond all reasonable doubt" my f'ing arse!
Who knows who may be next on the list;) Hello Gitmo!
Wakey, wakey (Obama), the USA the only country in the world to have legitimised physical torture and, bizarrely, disgustingy, even has a set of rules how it should be conducted! And where it can be practised, ie outside US territory, where they think they are immune from prosecution by international law, so they think. We will see? (almost all the Nazi extermination camps were located outside Germany, in Poland;) The enormous tasks of compiling and tracking the huge lists of those who were to become victims and their details, given numbers (to be tattooed or sometimes branded on), destinations, timetables, logistics etc. were run by IBM;). Although not, apparently, a Nazi sympathiser (it was just business!) Bush's grandfather was on the board of directors (7) of the (US) Union Banking Corporation that was only forced to stop doing business with the Nazi's in 1942! under the 'Trading with The Enemy' act;) Even the Nazi's (although obviously, practising it extensively in the most heinous manner possible) didn't attempt to legitimise torture;)) Bush and Blair (Obama?) and their accomplices shouldn't sleep just too easy, the 'game' is not over yet, not by a long chalk!

Scrum Drum
06-30-11, 12:05 PM
You are, yet again, just repeating a totally unsupported assertion made by yourself, as usual without a reference that has already been requested I don't expect one from you will be forthcoming, or ever;)


You're just in contempt of what's already known. The Etchingham Petition spurred a phony reinterviewing of the witnesses by Scotland Yard. They went out and used the same defense lawyer tactics you are using here and got the witnesses to say things they could then take out of context and portray as the witnesses backing off their statements. It was in the reinvestigation that Scotland Yard looked at the phone records and found the phone call came from the payphone across the street according to phone records. If you doubt this you are only doubting established fact and therefore showing everybody the disingenuousness of your approach. It is well-known that Scotland Yard determined the call for the ambulance came from the payphone across the street from the Samarkand. This was also cross-witnessed by the ambulance attendants who said no one was there at the flat when they arrived. And is now even better cross-witnessed by Slater's admission in the British magazine. If you doubt this you are only doubting established fact and confirming your lack of credibility. Sorry but you have to offer more than knee-jerk doubt of everything to credibly investigate this.

Scrum Drum
06-30-11, 12:24 PM
Many I am not even talking about the undigested "rice" in his stomach (what is the evidence on that? Kathy E.? Autopsy report?). Again, I think the court hearing was more of a formality with which everyone involved could live with. Weird and sad.



It turns out Stella said Jimi felt bad that she had gone out and gotten chinese take-out for him and he didn't eat any. So right before he left with Monika he took a gulp of Stella's food. This would explain the whole rice grains found by Dr Teare at the autopsy in Jimi's stomach. I have seen a report that Jimi's stomach was full of rice but have to trace it. I previously thought Jimi had eaten the rice at midnight when Stella ordered the food however Henderson interviewed Stella and found Jimi gulped some rice prior to leaving.

The Inquest did a non-investigation because Jimi had been assassinated by the intelligence agency of their main ally America. That's why they declined a re-opening of the case, even with so much obvious evidence, and declared Monika's story to be true (which they are still sticking with even now). Most people who blithely think Jimi died by accident are woefully unaware of the history of intel assassination and their methods. They should look up the case of Dorothy Kilgallen and her CIA assassination using a CIA agent male lover and barbiturates and alcohol.

stplsd
06-30-11, 12:52 PM
And is now even better cross-witnessed by Slater's admission in the British magazine.

You claiming something was said in a "British magazine" is not "established fact", it's nothing more than an unsupported assertion.
Yet again you have failed to provide any reference when asked.

Scrum Drum
06-30-11, 12:56 PM
You claiming something was said in a "British magazine" is not evidence, it's nothing more than an unsupported assertion.
Yet again you have failed to provide any reference when asked.


Only if you are using cheap dodges to avoid the obvious. The article exists and you are in denial of it as is shown by your ignoring of all the cross-references I spoke of. It's clear what is being avoided/denied here.

stplsd
06-30-11, 12:57 PM
It turns out Stella said Jimi felt bad that she had gone out and gotten chinese take-out for him and he didn't eat any. So right before he left with Monika he took a gulp of Stella's food. .

For someone who refers to Henderson almost entirely, claiming him as an infallible authority, you should have noticed that Henderson has the food as Polynesian, not Chinese, in his 1st edition. In his 2008 heavily revised edition. He has re-written this chapter and doesn't mention what kind of food it is. There is no "gulping" (or "mouthfulls" as you miquoted earlier) It doesn't say that she went out to get the food, or that she "felt bad" either. In neither does it mention rice (although I'm willing to accept that he ate rice there, as I can't imagine there would be rice in a fish sandwich?). I'm beginning to wonder if you've even read the book;).
Henderson has amphetamine and lsd sending Devon to sleep, f'ing hilarious.



your ignoring of all the cross-references I spoke of.
The only "cross reference" you have given is the well-known story of the ambulance men, told by Kathy, that they didn't find anyone at the flat. I have aleady mentioned this in detail anyway http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?3733-24-August-1970-to-∞-(part-III)
not ignored it.

stplsd
06-30-11, 12:57 PM
Only if you are using cheap dodges to avoid the obvious. Asking you to back up your assertions is not a "cheap dodge"

The article exists . Prove it. Tell us what magazine and the date. Or show us a scan.

Scrum Drum
06-30-11, 02:10 PM
For those not interested in filling-up the thread with semantic noise being used to divert away from the relevant facts the Scotland Yard
determination that the phone call came from the payphone across the street isn't challenged by reasonable people here for genuine purposes.

MourningStar
06-30-11, 02:37 PM
Just stumbled across this (http://www.allmanbrothersband.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=print&fid=15&tid=19883) on the web. It seems my recall was off. It does mention a call Monika made in Slater's presence (3rd hit when doing word search on 'Slater') but nothing regarding 'payphone' or 'across the street'. Also, the data on the site appears to contain extractions from an article authored by Robert L. Doerschuk in the magazine I identified a few posts earlier. I should add that Michael Fairchild has claimed that the article's contents were 'lifted' from earlier research of his, fwiw.

This link or the contents may already have been posted somewhere here. However, these topics are too chaotic, disorganized and of lengths beyond reasonable for me to bother reviewing just now.

stplsd
06-30-11, 02:40 PM
For those not interested in filling-up the thread with semantic noise being used to divert away from the relevant fac.

Asking you to prove your assertion by providing the name and date, or a scan of a magazine you claim an interview was given in is not "semantic noise." You claiming something does not make it a "relevant fact"

MourningStar
06-30-11, 03:06 PM
SD-stplsd:

... if someone posts information that they read in a magazine, fine. If I read it also, fine. If I find, scan and post the information for all to see, fine. Now, the two of you can move on. However, ...

Does this mean the information is 'truth'?


heh, heh, carry on,

stplsd
06-30-11, 03:13 PM
It does mention a call Monika made in Slater's presence (3rd hit when doing word search on 'Slater') but nothing regarding 'payphone' or 'across the street'. .

"9:30 a.m. Slater can't find Jimi at his old hotel, so he goes to Burdon's. Burdon fell asleep after the first call and has woken back up and is on the phone again with Monika in Slater's presence."

Unfortunately Peter Nelson doesn't say where he got this info from.

the next mention of a phone call is
"11:18 a.m. Phone call from the Samarkand for an ambulance"

That's it.


If I find, scan and post the information for all to see, fine.

It's not the same info.

kdion11
06-30-11, 03:45 PM
Asking you to prove your assertion by providing the name and date, or a scan of a magazine you claim an interview was given in is not "semantic noise." You claiming something does not make it a "relevant fact"

KD: Here, here ! Admit STPLSD - you're just playing semantics here ! Not.

kdion11
06-30-11, 03:48 PM
Only if you are using cheap dodges to avoid the obvious. The article exists and you are in denial of it as is shown by your ignoring of all the cross-references I spoke of. It's clear what is being avoided/denied here.


KD: Sounds like "semantics" !

kdion11
06-30-11, 05:05 PM
The Slater-Dannemann payphone incident is referred in the 1996-Feb issue of Musician, as I vaguely recall. However, that is an American magazine I believe. If someone has it can you please confirm?

-thnx

KD: I remember that mag / issue. The author of the piece interviewed MD and faxed her a list of very ackward questions exposing her on all of her lies about Jimi's death. This was the first mainstream media article on her complete lack of credibility. She committed suicide shortly thereafter. I'll see if I can find my copy of this on the pile................

Scrum Drum
06-30-11, 05:30 PM
Scotland Yard determined that the phone call for the ambulance came from the payphone across the street. If you doubt that you are just in contemptuous denial of the known facts.

Rupe
06-30-11, 05:33 PM
Can I ask how you know Scotland Yard established the source of the phone call? Have they published their findings?

MourningStar
06-30-11, 05:34 PM
^
thnx KD!





If I find, scan and post the information for all to see, fine.It's not the same info.The term 'information' is being used generically/illustratively in the context of that post. If no one else 'got it', the point was to convey that the 'proof' (identification of the UK mag) being demanded will in any case, mattering not one iota if provided or not, turn out to be of a subjective nature.

"What is 'truth'?"

stplsd
06-30-11, 06:10 PM
KD: I remember that mag / issue. The author of the piece interviewed MD and faxed her a list of very ackward questions exposing her on all of her lies about Jimi's death. This was the first mainstream media article on her complete lack of credibility. She committed suicide shortly thereafter. I'll see if I can find my copy of this on the pile................

Looking forward to it kd, sounds veery interesting.

stplsd
06-30-11, 06:54 PM
the point was to convey that the 'proof' (identification of the UK mag) being demanded will in any case, mattering not one iota if provided or not, turn out to be of a subjective nature. "What is 'truth'?"

Oh I got your point all right. I've been making the same point for long enough, I would say dodgy rather than "subjective" though:)

My point though is that SD ignores anything that contradicts his story, he's very inaccurate and is just accepting things he's "heard", not quoting accurately, adding stuff that is not in the original, not reading the source, or finding out if the source claimed is genuine. A major one being the claim that Crawdaddy said a "death squad" killed Jimi. There is no article in Crawdaddy claiming this. His vehement claim that Hendrix was definitely murdered, beyond reasonable doubt, and then failing to provide reliable evidence of this, merely reasserting his claims in long winded, convoluted, diatribes, branding anyone that asks him to verify his "evidence" as "deniers", or worse, is an outrageous and unacceptable way to construct a reasonable case, or conduct a debate.

stplsd
06-30-11, 06:59 PM
Scotland Yard determined that the phone call for the ambulance came from the payphone across the street. If you doubt that you are just in contemptuous denial of the known facts.

I'm doubting you. I haven't doubted that there is a Slater story to that effect. I know where the major published one is, and you don't that's the point;)

MourningStar
06-30-11, 07:03 PM
...My point though is that SD ignores anything that contradicts his story, he's very inaccurate and is just accepting things he's "heard", not quoting accurately, adding stuff that is not in the original, not reading the source, or finding out if the source claimed is genuine. A major one being the claim that Crawdaddy said a "death squad" killed Jimi. There is no article in Crawdaddy claiming this. His vehement claim that Hendrix was definitely murdered, beyond reasonable doubt, and then failing to provide reliable evidence of this, merely reasserting his claims in long winded, convoluted, diatribes, branding anyone that asks him to verify his "evidence" as "deniers", or worse, is an outrageous and unacceptable way to construct a reasonable case, or conduct a debate.Well, as long as everyone maintains an air of civility, people can and will debate the issue until the plug is pulled.

MourningStar
06-30-11, 07:08 PM
I'm doubting you. I haven't doubted that there is a Slater story to that effect. I know where the major published one is, and you don't that's the point;)If you knew all along about the publication or information you were demanding SD provide, ... man, that's just not cool.

stplsd
06-30-11, 07:43 PM
If you knew all along about the publication or information you were demanding SD provide, ... man, that's just not cool.

I never doubted the existance of the Slater story in any of my posts. I don't see what is "un cool" about expecting someone to provide their sources when asked. I've stated my entirely legitimate reasons for my requests above.

MourningStar
06-30-11, 07:56 PM
If you knew all along about the publication or information you were demanding SD provide, ... man, that's just not cool.I don't see what is "un cool" about expecting someone to provide their sources when asked.Point is you knew the info all along, but proceeded w/your malicious agenda. The next time you antagonize a member in this fashion, be not dismayed if you are summarily dismissed.

stplsd
06-30-11, 08:12 PM
Point is you knew the info all along, but proceeded w/your malicious agenda. The next time you antagonize a member in this fashion, be not dismayed if you are summarily dismissed.

Point is I did not deny the the existence of the said story. I merely, very reasonably, asked him to back up his assertions, which he has signally failed to do throughout his overtly malicious campaign of vilification against anyone who disagees with him, or requests him to back up his assertions. How this simple request can be construed by you as "a malicious agenda" is a questionable conclusion. We have yet to see said article and if it does indeed say what is claimed. It certainly appears not to be a "British magazine" anyway;). Hopefully KD will provide us with an answer. My remembrance of the story is from a book.

MourningStar
06-30-11, 08:16 PM
Point is you knew the info all along, but proceeded w/your malicious agenda. The next time you antagonize a member in this fashion, be not dismayed if you are summarily dismissed.
Point is I ...your point, not mine!

trampledunderfoot
06-30-11, 08:34 PM
...Maybe Jimi isn't dead at all, and the entire conspiracy was just a ruse so that he could live his true life as an agent of espionage!

Scrum Drum
07-01-11, 02:00 AM
Point is you knew the info all along, but proceeded w/your malicious agenda. The next time you antagonize a member in this fashion, be not dismayed if you are summarily dismissed.


Good, finally some honesty. It feels like fresh air. It took you long enough to realize what STP's been doing. I knew it a long time ago. In other words my facts were correct and STP knew it but wouldn't admit it. But let's extend that to the broader level that's called for. You might want to take notice that the method of argument STP used against me while knowing what I said was true is also the exact same method he uses towards Bannister. And even Jimi's murder. And let's also interpret how that reflects on the main evidentiary points STP categorically ignored. Realize STP is willing to make us spend pages proving something he already knows is true. Like I said pages ago, it's clear who's honestly trying to find out the facts and who isn't.

purple jim
07-01-11, 02:08 AM
Scotland Yard determined that the phone call for the ambulance came from the payphone across the street. If you doubt that you are just in contemptuous denial of the known facts.

You are always telling us that Scotland Yard were actors in the conspiracy" and now, presto, YOU accept what they say as being "fact" ? This is getting confusing.

Scrum Drum
07-01-11, 02:09 AM
Can I ask how you know Scotland Yard established the source of the phone call? Have they published their findings?


Sorry, I'll try to find the exact source. What happened was Kathy Etchingham spurred a re-investigation by Scotland Yard where they went and recovered the ambulance records. Ambulance calls usually involve serious matters so they are recorded. The Ambulance service recorded the call on their records and it showed it came from the payphone across the street from the Samarkand Hotel.

The reason this is important is because it legally proves Monika's story is false and therefore the official British Inquest death verdict is also null and void LEGALLY. Scotland Yard doesn't seem interested in this however and is still sticking with Monika's story. They also showed no interest in Eric Burdon's admission in his 1986 biography that Monika called him "as the first light of dawn entered my window" (5:45am) "and maybe even earlier".

stplsd
07-01-11, 02:59 AM
It took you long enough to realize what STP's been doing.
Yes I've been asking you to back up your assertions, which you haven’t done.
We have yet to read this story you claim. I’m not so sure it is true now. I can’t find my copy of Kathy's book. I thought I’d read it in there. So no-one here has come up with the goods yet.

In other words my facts were correct
We have yet to see if that is the case. If the story exists. It is not a “fact” anyway it’s Stamp telling a story or someone claiming that Stamp said so and so. We'd need to see it.

and STP knew it but wouldn't admit it.
I wasn’t denying it or arguing with you.

You might want to take notice that the method of argument STP used against me while knowing what I said was true
Yes my "method" was to simply ask you to back up your assertion that there is a story in a "recent British magazine" So far it hasn't been produced. As with your claim that a copy of Crawdaddy has the "conclusion" that Jimi was murdered by a "death squad" No-one has been able to produce this either, because it doesn't exist. I'm now not sure if the Slater story as you have told it actually exists either.
is also the exact same method he uses towards Bannister.
You have not been struck off the medical register for fraud as far as I’m aware? Still hanging your case on the word of a fraudster, well, well

And even Jimi's murder.
You have shown no credible evidence of that so far.

Realize STP is willing to make us spend pages proving something he already knows is true.
I haven’t made you do anything. I'm merely asking you to demonstrate what you claim is true. You still haven't done that.

Like I said pages ago, it's clear who's honestly trying to find out the facts and who isn't.
Yeah, me. So far I’ve seen precious few reliable facts for anything apart from Jimi went to two parties, at the latter of which, Pete Kameron's, he took some amphetamine and left around 03:00. Was picked up by Monika and driven to the Samarkand where he took an overdose of Vesparax barbiturates and choked to death on his vomit. One notable fact is that almost everyone concerned has stories that significanty differ, conflict, and/or change significantly with each telling, and/or have tailored there stories to fit an obvious agenda.
We have yet to see an accurate account of what was said at the coroner's court, or a verifiable report of the autopsy conclusions.

stplsd
07-01-11, 04:07 AM
Sorry, I'll try to find the exact source.
I think we'll be in for a long wait


What happened was Kathy Etchingham spurred a re-investigation by Scotland Yard where they went and recovered the ambulance records. Ambulance calls usually involve serious matters so they are recorded. The Ambulance service recorded the call on their records and it showed it came from the payphone across the street from the Samarkand Hotel.

Source?


The reason this is important is because it legally proves Monika's story is false
It does nothing of the sort. It's a bit of poetic license in a book that's full of such. Obviously "inspired" by Jimi's First Rays Of The New Rising Sun

and therefore the official British Inquest death verdict is also null and void LEGALLY.
That's not how the law works. An autobiography is not a sworn legal testament especially Burdon's as former band mates have called his "memory" of other events into question


Scotland Yard doesn't seem interested in this however

Hardly surprising. It was 40 years ago and as Kathy says: “One of the policemen told me that he thought all the witnesses were ‘fucking lying’ for different reasons of their own."
Kathy: “I don’t think there is any business that attracts so many fantasists, conmen and flakes as the music business."


and is still sticking with Monika's story.
They're not sticking by anything. They are just not re-opening the case, I imagine, because there is no reliable new evidence of anything and it would therefore be a waste of time and money.


They also showed no interest in Eric Burdon's admission in his 1986 biography that Monika called him "as the first light of dawn entered my window" (5:45am) "[I]and maybe even earlier".

There you go again. He does not say "and maybe even earlier" in his book. What he actually says is "The first light of dawn* was coming through the window, and it was raining outside." That is why I am asking you to back up your assertions. 05:45 on a cloudy late September morning in London surrounded by tall buildings would not have daylight from 'the first light of dawn' coming through the window, does the guy not have curtains or what? Did he get up before 6 to watch the sunrise on cold, wet, cloudy morning. He leaves out this detail in a 1992 interview and in his second book. Saying just that he arrived as the ambulance was leaving ie after 11:35. And that he found Monika and Alvinia there. Both Alvinia and Monika say they were at the hospital, Alvinia says she arrived on her own just as the ambulance was leaving, She doesn't mention Burdon being at the flat. None of them mention Slater. She only saw Monika after she arrived at the hospital. This begs the question how did she know which hospital to go to? And that after Stickells arrived ie quite a bit after 11:35 "a few clouds had broken and the rain had stopped, and the sun was beating down on the pavement of the wet street. The word love was scrawled in the window of the Opel." ie it was still there when it was warm. It could, if true and not just poetic license, be steam and anyone could have written it. Monica says it was dust in her book.

* ie First Rays Of The New Rising Sun;)

dino77
07-01-11, 04:46 AM
There you go again. He does not say "and maybe even earlier" in his book. What he actually says is "The first light of dawn was coming through the window, and it was raining outside." That is why I am asking you to vback up your assertions.

Haven't read the whole thread to see if another witness backs up the time when Burdon received the call, but this phrase just struck me a particularly dumb, like the ghost writer had poetic ambitions. First light of dawn...that's whenever you wake up and it's no longer dark, isn't it? Especially with Burdon, who had been drugging and/or drinking.

stplsd
07-01-11, 05:44 AM
^
Apparently Burdon wrote both his books himself.

According to a Peter Nelson on the Alman Bros site, who has read and quotes extensively from the Musician article sited by MS:

"9:30 a.m. Slater can't find Jimi at his old hotel [ie the Cumberland], so he goes to Burdon's. Burdon fell asleep after the first call and has woken back up and is on the phone again with Monika in Slater's presence." ie It's after 09:30, quite possibly quite a bit after when Monika phones in this version

It's not a quote from the article. And unfortunately Nelson doesn't say where he got this info from. It may be info from the article, expressed in his own words, but it's not clear.

Of course we have to remember that the only evidence for Slater being involved at this early part of the morning is 2nd hand reports of what he said to so-and-so. Stickells in one interview, many years after the event, says Slater phoned him around 09:00 to tell him there was "trouble with Jimi at the hotel" a vague description this is unnatested elsewhere. And that he was photographed much later in the afternoon with Monica and Barret leaving the Samarkand flat. I've only seen one direct interview of him and he doesn't mention being there at this early hour. Only that he visted the flat very much earlier the previous evening.

stplsd
07-01-11, 08:14 AM
Oh, found the Etchingham book, apparently Slater told her that he got there before the ambulance and saw Jimi lying "knackered", whatever that is supposed to mean. But that he later told the police that he arrived just as the ambulance was leaving too, and that Monika was there after it left. No mention of Alvinia or Burdon being there. And nothing about a phonebox either.

MourningStar
07-01-11, 12:02 PM
Point is you knew the info all along, but proceeded w/your malicious agenda. The next time you antagonize a member in this fashion, be not dismayed if you are summarily dismissed.

Good, finally some honesty. It feels like fresh air. It took you long enough to realize what STP's been doing. I knew it a long time ago. In other words my facts were correct and STP knew it but wouldn't admit it. But let's extend that to the broader level that's called for. You might want to take notice that the method of argument STP used against me while knowing what I said was true is also the exact same method he uses towards Bannister. And even Jimi's murder. And let's also interpret how that reflects on the main evidentiary points STP categorically ignored. Realize STP is willing to make us spend pages proving something he already knows is true. Like I said pages ago, it's clear who's honestly trying to find out the facts and who isn't.

oh, don't get so high and mighty about it SD. I/We've known this member's machinations long before you ever came on board. I/we typically won't point out the obvious. As is known, it only makes things worse. However, public removal of one's shoes followed by a meal of à pied just begs for comment and we all know (and tolerate, I thank all) my weakness.

Scrum Drum
07-01-11, 01:07 PM
oh, don't get so high and mighty about it SD. I/We've known this member's machinations long before you ever came on board. I/we typically won't point out the obvious. As is known, it only makes things worse. However, public removal of one's shoes followed by a meal of à pied just begs for comment and we all know (and tolerate, I thank all) my weakness.


I really wish we could dispense with this irrelevant material. If we filter through the volumes of inert material and annoyingly unnecessary run-arounds we can establish the basic point that both the Scotland Yard record and Slater's admission reveal the phone call for the ambulance came from the payphone across the street. This tells you Monika's story was a lie. A proper investigator will then try to determine why Monika lied about this and what conclusions it leads to as far as evidence. Those trying to obstruct the flow of truth by constantly trying to pull the issue into filibusters of gratuitous doubt and endless rabbit holes are not honestly trying to determine what happened from the reasonable evidence we do have. Their dishonest arguments should not be entertained.

The reason I'm pointing towards Slater's admission is because it officially proves the accepted official story is false. Therefore the verdict based upon it isn't valid. Once you formally prove a cause of death verdict was based on false information the authorities are legally compelled to re-investigate the case. The reason the British Government refuses to do this is because they know the evidence is so strong that it will inevitably lead to proof of murder and they desperately don't want to do that because it will then become clear they participated in the cover-up of the murder of a popular musician who they themselves honored with a Blue Plaque. This is true and it's like pulling teeth to get people to admit even basic proven things. The case can clearly be re-opened and proceeded upon by entering through this entrance. Scotland Yard needs to be sued to hold it responsible for violating its own law and saying there was no new evidence.

By the way, it's obvious Stickells was being vague about the Samarkand and all the information around it because he knew a lot more than he could admit. You can see people who are hyper-critical in almost all other instances allowing Stickells to say Burdon called them because Jimi was in serious trouble but neglected to tell them where he was. Look at the hyper-critical arguments these people make otherwise but then look how they give no criticism to this obvious childish lie that no one would accept. It's simply unbelievable that Jimi Hendrix would be in a life struggle needing the assistance of others and when called those others were not told where he was. Watch how they ignore this and refuse to answer it. What Stickells is doing there is an obvious transparent lie in order not to entrap himself with the admission they all knew about the Samarkand in advance and why they had been called there. The British Government would NEVER let any suspects get away with these cheezy lies in a murder case in any other circumstances except this one. Never. What you are looking at is the classic reaction of people who knew god-damned well they had to cover their knowledge of Jeffery's murder of Hendrix. They obviously panicked and tried to disassociate themselves from their knowledge of the Samarkand. Once again, we see people trying to flagrantly ignore the necessary conclusions from Jimi walking over to Stickells place from the Samarkand to visit Billy. Stickells had to know about the Samarkand since they were deciding whether Monika would look after Billy at the Samarkand. It's obvious that Billy ended-up being looked after in places under the control of Jimi's management. Since they were considering the Samarkand that means they were considering places that were known by Jimi's management. It doesn't take a genius to figure out the Samarkand being only 2 blocks from Stickells wasn't an accident. But what makes it even more obvious is these transparent attempts to lie around knowledge of the Samarkand by those involved. You can't get away with ignoring this and still say you're honestly investigating it. What is more than obvious from these "vague" comments is that those involved were trying to avoid admitting their true knowledge and what it suggested. And once you put Slater's admission to the British magazine in Dec '70 that he was at the Samarkand earlier that night but didn't realize what would transpire later on into this context you understand exactly why they are trying to lie around their true knowledge. Why didn't any authority press Slater on this admission - or even Monika on her statement that "the mafia did it for sure"???

purple jim
07-01-11, 02:09 PM
The fact that some people were there to clean up, in no way prooves murder. If the first people on the scene found Monika gibbering hysterically and Jimi on the bed with no pulse/breathing, blue and eyes wide open, he was evidently stone dead as far as they were concerned. So the "clean-up" of drugs and guitar continued.

Again, if Scotland Yard covered up, why would they give the information about the pay phone?

Also, a hit team wouldn't have done anything as visible as water-boarding, which would be an obviouse sign of murder. A lethal heroin jab would have been easier and more overlooked death by the police (or whoever) especially as Jimi was such an icon of the drug culture.
A smart person knows this.

stplsd
07-01-11, 02:57 PM
The fact that some people were there to clean up, in no way prooves murder.

It's highly unlikely that anyone else was at the Samarkand when the ambulance arrived apart from Monika. There was only one guitar and if there were any illegal drugs it would have been a very small amount, and wouldn't have taken more that two minutes to flush down the toilet or chuck out the window. The guitar stayed with Monika. The timing of events nearly forty years ago is extrememly dubious, especially Slater's claimed, 2nd hand, "testimony" and Burdon's - an arch story teller, by several accounts. There is nothing here that one could base a case for murder on. We have yet to see any evidence regarding the payphone.

MourningStar
07-01-11, 03:03 PM
I really wish we could dispense with this irrelevant material.never gonna happen Virginia, not here!


If we filter through the volumes of inert material and annoyingly unnecessary run-arounds we can establish the basic point that ...... all that remains will be your p.o.v.??? Or is it the other way around??? - headscratch1


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/crzy1.gif

stplsd
07-01-11, 03:12 PM
I've known this member's machinations .

So asking someone who made several highly innacurate "quotes", references, even to at least one article that doesn't even exist, to back up their statements is "machination," "malicious agenda," get real, have a look in the mirror before you start accusing others. We still have not seen any source for his claims about Salter and the pay phone. The Scotland yard stuff etc. etc.

Scrum Drum
07-01-11, 03:15 PM
The fact that some people were there to clean up, in no way prooves murder. If the first people on the scene found Monika gibbering hysterically and Jimi on the bed with no pulse/breathing, blue and eyes wide open, he was evidently stone dead as far as they were concerned. So the "clean-up" of drugs and guitar continued.


This doesn't make sense if you look at the criminal forensics. It doesn't wash that the first responders would just say "oh well, he's dead. Let's clean the flat for 5 hours". This is Jimi Hendrix. People would have at least tried to clean the vomit out of his throat and save him. This goes for Monika too. It is highly unlikely Monika would stand there drooling like a vegetable and freeze-up and not do anything. She would also try to clear the vomit out of Jimi's throat and get him breathing. What you are looking at is people who had a clear understanding of Jimi's troubles with Jeffery and what the potential results were. The reason they didn't try to save him is because they knew he had been murdered for firing Jeffery. These were office members close to the reasons and understanding of them. Knowing he can't say "We all knew the reason" Burdon instead says "I just couldn't bring myself to go in and look at that mess". By the way, for Jimi to be "stone dead" at that juncture would mean he died right around the time of Tappy's claim.




Again, if Scotland Yard covered up, why would they give the information about the pay phone?


I guess they had no choice because it was in the Ambulance Service's phone records. But what if Scotland Yard tries to cover it up by forging the phone records or losing them? They then have Slater make his admission that would contradict their claim. This would expose them because they have many people, including the ambulance attendants, saying Monika wasn't there. They couldn't get away with it is the answer. Instead they headed this off by refusing to re-investigate the case. They have no excuse for honoring Monika's lies.



Also, a hit team wouldn't have done anything as visible as water-boarding, which would be an obviouse sign of murder. A lethal heroin jab would have been easier and more overlooked death by the police (or whoever) especially as Jimi was such an icon of the drug culture.
A smart person knows this.


No, no, no - just the opposite. Drowning in wine in combination with barbiturates gives the appearance of a drug overdose. It's a military intelligence method of covert murder that Jeffery would be familiar with. It leaves no marks on the body and appears as a drug overdose. The fact they got away with it for decades proves its value for covert murder. A heroin jab would leave Monika having to explain too much. (Though Devon may have died that way)


By the way, you can see no one even attempts to answer the direct point that it isn't believable that Burdon would call for help from the road crew members and not tell them where Jimi was. Stickells obviously made-up that bs story about going to the Cumberland to find Jimi because he didn't know about the Samarkand exactly because he DID know about the Samarkand and wanted to cover up the reasons why. He went to the Cumberland to pick-up Slater and bring him to the Samarkand. Why do you think Stickells has never been made to explain this?

stplsd
07-01-11, 03:15 PM
I really wish we could dispense with this irrelevant material.

Yeah me too there's mountains of unsupported verbosity masqueraduing as fact.

kdion11
07-01-11, 05:13 PM
Originally Posted by kdion11 http://crosstowntorrents.org/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?p=55983#post55983)
KD: I remember that mag / issue. The author of the piece interviewed MD and faxed her a list of very ackward questions exposing her on all of her lies about Jimi's death. This was the first mainstream media article on her complete lack of credibility. She committed suicide shortly thereafter. I'll see if I can find my copy of this on the pile................


Looking forward to it kd, sounds veery interesting.

KD: Yep, I'll see if I can dig it out this weekend. Again, this is the first time (that I know / can think of) that Monica was
publically challenged on her dubious recollections by someone with a very good idea of what actually transpired. You can
virtually see her squirm under the scrutiny - a couple of months later she was no mo' !

kdion11
07-01-11, 05:21 PM
Oh I got your point all right. I've been making the same point for long enough, I would say dodgy rather than "subjective" though:)

My point though is that SD ignores anything that contradicts his story, he's very inaccurate and is just accepting things he's "heard", not quoting accurately, adding stuff that is not in the original, not reading the source, or finding out if the source claimed is genuine. A major one being the claim that Crawdaddy said a "death squad" killed Jimi. There is no article in Crawdaddy claiming this. His vehement claim that Hendrix was definitely murdered, beyond reasonable doubt, and then failing to provide reliable evidence of this, merely reasserting his claims in long winded, convoluted, diatribes, branding anyone that asks him to verify his "evidence" as "deniers", or worse, is an outrageous and unacceptable way to construct a reasonable case, or conduct a debate.

KD: Here, here. Well said STP - couldn't have said it better myself. As to the "moderator" who think STP and myself are ganging up or engaging in any "personal attacks" again SD or anyone else, I beg to differ. We are simply refusing to take any of his positions seriously because of his lack of evidence to back up his claims.

I'll continue to keep an open mind as to what did or did not transpire on the evening of Sept. 18th, 1970 but refuse outright
to go along with any wild conspirary theories not backed up by hard facts or evidence.

Nor would I expect anyone else to back any wild theories I may have without any evidence or facts to back those up either.

kdion11
07-01-11, 05:26 PM
Well, as long as everyone maintains an air of civility, people can and will debate the issue until the plug is pulled.

KD: Here, here.............. Isn't that what debates / message boards are all about ?
As far as

"Scotland Yard determined that the phone call for the ambulance came from the payphone across the street"

I would love to know that ! In 1970 there was no technology to determine "Caller ID" or specific origins of any incoming
phone call. Evidence please !

kdion11
07-01-11, 05:34 PM
Point is you knew the info all along, but proceeded w/your malicious agenda. The next time you antagonize a member in this fashion, be not dismayed if you are summarily dismissed.


KD: "Malicious Agenda" ? Now I've heard everything. At no time, IMHO has STPLSD gone after SD or anyone else with any
malicious intent. If SD or anyone else puts up anything here as "fact" then in the spirit of debate the onus should be on THEM
to provide the proof or origins of the information that supports their case.

So for asking for proof one here can be "summarily dismissed" ? Say it ain't so please !

kdion11
07-01-11, 05:38 PM
Sorry, I'll try to find the exact source. What happened was Kathy Etchingham spurred a re-investigation by Scotland Yard where they went and recovered the ambulance records. Ambulance calls usually involve serious matters so they are recorded. The Ambulance service recorded the call on their records and it showed it came from the payphone across the street from the Samarkand Hotel.

The reason this is important is because it legally proves Monika's story is false and therefore the official British Inquest death verdict is also null and void LEGALLY. Scotland Yard doesn't seem interested in this however and is still sticking with Monika's story. They also showed no interest in Eric Burdon's admission in his 1986 biography that Monika called him "as the first light of dawn entered my window" (5:45am) "and maybe even earlier".

KD: Again, "Caller ID" or any other type of inbound call record detail did not exist in 1970. Please provide written documentation
proving this "fact" from Scottland Yard.

MourningStar
07-01-11, 05:49 PM
So for asking for proof one here can be "summarily dismissed" ? Say it ain't so please !It ain't so.

However, if you carefully review, you will discover that the information being demanded was already known and purposely witheld in order to force an issue. It is malicious and in 'the old west' would be analogous to 'holding a card up one's sleeve'. All know what happens to one who cheats at cards.

kdion11
07-01-11, 05:55 PM
It ain't so.

However, if you carefully review, you will discover that the information being demanded was already known and purposely witheld in order to force an issue. It is malicious and in 'the old west' would be analogous to 'holding a card up one's sleeve'. All know what happens to one who cheats at cards.

KD: I beg to differ. Just because STPLSD has a better understanding of the facts, and background of Jimi's death, not to mention the "rules" of serious debate, surely doesn't mean that he cannot ask SD to provide "facts" or evidence to support his obviously flawed viewpoint ?

Rupe
07-01-11, 06:03 PM
It ain't so.

However, if you carefully review, you will discover that the information being demanded was already known and purposely witheld in order to force an issue. It is malicious and in 'the old west' would be analogous to 'holding a card up one's sleeve'. All know what happens to one who cheats at cards.

I also beg to differ. If someone is making an assertion, they should be able to show where there information comes from. If they can't, they're just repeating hearsay. Nothing to do with cheating at cards!

MourningStar
07-01-11, 06:58 PM
KD-Rupe - Discussion, debate, whatever - if somebody gives information and does not provide support data, and I know of the support data that can confirm the information, and maybe even able to provide it, I will. What I will not do is play the children's 'prove it' game in this scenario. This is what has occurred and it is malicious as well as juvenile. End.

thunderbaas
07-01-11, 08:27 PM
I am really amazed... reading this mess..!Months after month..

Scum Drum; you don`t know shit about reality= ReaL Life!! You know what? I guess you don`t know anything about Jimis music! Prove me wrong!! You`re only one of these crazy conspiratory guys, they are all over the net. Jimis memory doesn`t need you!!

Jimi Hendrix is about joy and life - not death and conspiratic bullshit!!! But I know you are beyond sanety...

Pederpropell

Have to agree with peder propell here,what else has Scum Drum contributed to CTT than to keep this thread going,he probably get's off on people reacting on his conspiracy bull shit.
Hasn't downloaded/uploaded annything here, I guess he's just here for his own fun. Like PP said, wonder if he ever listens to Jimi??????
Thunderbaas

MourningStar
07-01-11, 08:38 PM
Have to agree with peder propell here,what else has Scum Drum contributed to CTT than to keep this thread going,he probably get's off on people reacting on his conspiracy bull shit.
Hasn't downloaded/uploaded annything here, I guess he's just here for his own fun like PP said, wonder if he ever listens to Jimi??????
Thunderbaascareful there TB, you've just dredged up one of those old posts that brought the police in here swinging their night-sticks around. Fortunately, they just issued a few warnings, not looking very happy as they drove away.

Scrum Drum
07-02-11, 12:35 AM
1) The Scotland Yard tracing of the call to the pay phone is well-known and true.


2) Both my claims about Slater and this call were correct.


3) None of the doubters have bothered to answer any of the operative points. For instance, like if they held Burdon and Stickells to the same degree of scrutiny they hold me to. Do these people really believe Burdon called Stickells to tell him Jimi was in serious trouble but neglected to tell him where he was? From the condition of the body Jimi was dead. So it is fairly certain Jimi was dead when Stickells was called - which makes it even more unlikely Burdon would neglect to tell Stickells where he was. Very hard to get a direct answer around here...

stplsd
07-02-11, 07:36 AM
1) The Scotland Yard tracing of the call to the pay phone is well-known and true.


So you say. We have yet to see any evidence supporting this


2) Both my claims about Slater and this call were correct.

So you say. We have yet to see any evidence supporting this


3) None of the doubters have bothered to answer any of the operative points.

Yes they have, maybe you haven't read them?


Very hard to get a direct answer around here...
...that supports your "theories"

stplsd
07-02-11, 07:49 AM
What I will not do is play the children's 'prove it' game in this scenario. This is what has occurred and it is malicious as well as juvenile. End.

Accepting someone's word that he has read something, or quoted/understood accurately - when they have clearly been shown to be unreliable in that regard- without any proof of the alleged contents appears to me to be a dodgy way to go about establishing anything.
As to the rest I suggest you take a good look in the mirror etc.

purple jim
07-02-11, 10:01 AM
Drowning in wine in combination with barbiturates gives the appearance of a drug overdose.

Utter drivel. Let's look a little closer at the absurdity of this "theory".
As far as your fictitious killers were concerned, they left a body behind with lungs FULL of wine. They couldn't possibly have calculated that the vomit would plug the windpipe, hiding their crime to a degree. So they left the body with lungs full of wine to be carted off to casualty with full the knowledge that their crime was very easy to see. But hey, no problem, the British government are with us on this one, they have the power to cover it all up. Top guys at Scotland Yard have been breifed. If any of the doctors, nurses, porters or the coroner say anything about this suspect death, the boys will go round and see them all one by one and threaten to kill their children or parents, or even waterboard them aswell.

Also, if Burdon and Co. were covering something up, it, was their own disgrace after having cleaned up the flat where a lifeless Jimi lay, blue and cold with eyes wide open (obviously overdosed and choked with his own vomit - something which could have happenned in a 10 minute period before they all got there). Which still raises the question of what the hell Danneman was doing.

Scrum Drum
07-02-11, 01:27 PM
^ With all respect Purple Jim you are typing a lot there without really saying anything. Your efforts appear to be regressive equivocation rather than acknowledging the points. Jimi didn't get the wine Bannister witnessed into him while possessing a knock-out level of barbiturate in his bloodstream as was recorded at the autopsy. And he couldn't have drank the wine earlier because it would have necessarily shown up in his blood alcohol level. I'm afraid your logic is somewhat backwards and counter to what is obvious.

The British press did its usual tabloid business and went after Jimi at the throat with character defamation to make sure the public saw Jimi was a sex and drug maniac on heroin with 2 girls in his bed at the same time. When you look at Hendrix's murder in the bigger picture using educated understanding of Operation Mockingbird with all its techniques you can see them fully employed with Hendrix. These programs existed and were real and were used. You are seeing their full purpose and deployment here in the British press treatment of Hendrix. This is what they were designed for. The most recent manifestations are occurring right under our noses in the form of recent unchallenged articles showing Jimi was effeminate (Vanity Fair); or Bob Levine's denial; and even the obvious false account by Meic Stevens (that also went unchallenged). You have to be wise as a serpent with this business to see how they operate. Classic intel defamation/disinformation ops. Security Index listee Jimi never stood a chance. You pretend that COINTELPRO didn't exist or that Jimi wouldn't have been one of their main targets.

The fallacy of your argument is shown in the simple fact you refuse to answer why, at this point, is Scotland Yard still sticking with Monika's story? You never answered that. This is the gateway by which to crack the case. Scotland Yard slammed the iron gate shut by announcing it would never re-investigate the case and that "It was not in the interest of the British Government or its people to do so." A very curious comment. (one of many)

MourningStar
07-02-11, 01:41 PM
... or Bob Levine's denial; and even the obvious false account by Meic Stevens (that also went unchallenged).Not being cognizant of the publications that these two accounts were in, can anyone who does know tell me if these are from the typical 'tell-all' type tabloids, publications that would not be worth any effort/energy to 'challenge', or highly reliable and repected publications?

Scrum Drum
07-02-11, 01:57 PM
Vanity Fair article that makes Jimi look like an unrecognized closet queen:


http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2010/09/remembering-jimi-hendrixs-vulnerable-side.html


Levine denial on "Music Radar" (British) site:


http://www.musicradar.com/news/guitars/jimi-hendrix-wasnt-murdered-by-his-manager-says-former-business-partner-453035


Meic Stevens fantasy - Daily Mail (British):


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2006992/Red-wine-led-Jimi-Hendrixs-death-says-close-friend-Meic-Stevens.html




These stories are angled in such a way as to satisfy those who don't look too deeply. If you seek to dismiss these sources you do so at the expense of seeing how the information in them is being used to steer public opinion away from the murder.

purple jim
07-02-11, 02:11 PM
^ With all respect Purple Jim you are typing a lot there without really saying anything. Your efforts appear to be regressive equivocation rather than acknowledging the points. Jimi didn't get the wine Bannister witnessed into him while possessing a knock-out level of barbiturate in his bloodstream as was recorded at the autopsy.

In actual fact Bannister didn't witness any wine in Jimi. He was simply remembering somebody else! He said so himself...an "unusually tall man". FACT! (not many of those around here).
If not he invented to whole thing for whatever personnal reasons he had (Danneman's statements, the fact he was struck off, etc.).

purple jim
07-02-11, 02:14 PM
This thread is ONLY about what one believes as to how Hendrix died, not to debate that process. That 'other' topic is for that. So, getting back on topic, there is a choice labeled 'Cry For Help Gone Wrong'. I'm not sure as to what this choice means. Currently it has only one vote, purple jim, and I would like your view as to why you picked this choice. I searched thru this thread and did not locate it if you did post, so if you did, a link will suffice. If you choose to keep your reasons unknown, that's cool. Thnx.

Hang on, I didn't place a vote! What's going on? I can't even see the result of the poll.

stplsd
07-02-11, 02:28 PM
Hang on, I didn't place a vote! What's going on? I can't even see the result of the poll.

He's mixed up purplz for purplejim, You haven't voted.

MourningStar
07-02-11, 02:34 PM
Hang on, I didn't place a vote! What's going on? I can't even see the result of the poll.oops, my bad. I will fix, sorry 'bout that.

MourningStar
07-02-11, 02:38 PM
This thread is ONLY about what one believes as to how Hendrix died, not to debate that process. That 'other' topic is for that. So, getting back on topic, there is a choice labeled 'Cry For Help Gone Wrong'. I'm not sure as to what this choice means. Currently it has only one vote, purplz, and I would like your view as to why you picked this choice. I searched thru this thread and did not locate it if you did post, so if you did, a link will suffice. If you choose to keep your reasons unknown, that's cool. Thnx.

Rupe
07-02-11, 02:55 PM
Not being cognizant of the publications that these two accounts were in, can anyone who does know tell me if these are from the typical 'tell-all' type tabloids, publications that would not be worth any effort/energy to 'challenge', or highly reliable and repected publications?

The Daily Mail is a right wing conservative newpaper
Vanity Fair is, as far as I know, a glossy womens magazine. But I thought that article was good, didn't think it made Jimi look like a closet queen at all.

Scrum Drum
07-02-11, 03:02 PM
The reaching out for help theory comes from Sharon Lawrence who suggested all the evidence showed the pressure Jimi was under made him take the Vesparax in a "fuck it" desperate attempt to let the fates decide whether he would survive it or not and that somehow Monika was responsible for the wine. Sharon failed to see the evidence for murder or comment on it after Wright's admission however.

There's no point in denying the wine. It's cross-referenced too obviously from many angles. Monika wouldn't have moaned in pain when asked about the wine unless it was real. It was the only time she lost composure when speaking about Jimi's death and the only time she had ever been asked directly about the wine. She lied about it and said she used it wash vomit off Jimi's face. But any simple look at the scene would see right away Jimi hadn't had any vomit cleaned off him. So far the doubters have ignored this and failed to answer an obvious simple point.


If you look at Monika's personality she's unnaturally calm and cunning under pressure. This is hardly the type of personality that would freeze-up and not react to a dying Jimi. If Monika was the dizzy blonde who froze in panic while Jimi died she probably would have broke under questioning. She never did. Instead she was cool and calculating and stuck with her lies while hinting the mafia killed Hendrix "for sure". This doesn't match a woman being claimed to have become hysterical and not helped Jimi.

stplsd
07-02-11, 04:29 PM
Vanity Fair article that makes Jimi look like an unrecognized closet queen:

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2010/09/remembering-jimi-hendrixs-vulnerable-side.html

Levine [accusation] on "Music Radar" (British) site:

http://www.musicradar.com/news/guitars/jimi-hendrix-wasnt-murdered-by-his-manager-says-former-business-partner-453035

Meic Stevens fantasy - Daily Mail (British):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2006992/Red-wine-led-Jimi-Hendrixs-death-says-close-friend-Meic-Stevens.html

These stories are angled in such a way as to satisfy those who don't look too deeply. If you seek to dismiss these sources you do so at the expense of seeing how the information in them is being used to steer public opinion away from the murder.

They aren't "angled" in anyway apart from what the individual has chosen to talk about. Sheila Weller is a well known, prize winning American writer and journalist who interviewed Jimi for Rolling Stone, and is writing in a women's magazine (something you apparently haven't noticed in your "zeal") about Jimi's 'sensitive' side, something Sheila (as per her 1969 interview) and many women are apparently attracted to in a man. You on the other hand appear to be offended by men with a sensitive side

Levine is now retired and is outright accusing Wright of fabrication, and Stevens is apparently an old buffer from Wales who is trying to claim a bit of dubious fame on the back of Wright's shameful pulp (the only connection).

You are the one that is "dismissing" these stories.

The only article deliberately "steering away" - "putting the final torpedo into the sinking ship" more like - of the ludicrous '"murder" plots is the Levine article. He has, eventually, decided to come clean on the cynical claims of murder plots by unscupulous people in order to sell badly written 'rock books' .

purple jim
07-02-11, 05:01 PM
Monika wouldn't have moaned in pain when asked about the wine unless it was real.

Have you actually heard a tape of that interview? In what actual way did she moan? It could have been like "Oh my God you got it all so wrong" or "Noo, I've had enought of all this". It would rather reveal her disconfort at remembering that terrible morning and the fact that she let him die (or killed him herself).
Just a phrase in Lawrence's book and you interpret it as an irrefutable confession that she watched thugs waterboard Jimi! Utterly bonkers.

stplsd
07-02-11, 08:22 PM
There's no point in denying the wine. It's cross-referenced too obviously from many angles.

“Cross referenced" "many angles" not! A golden publicity opporunity to sell a book on, they thought, more like, used in two very different tales by people with zero credibilty, based on a story by the disgraced Bannister. Bannister first mentioned the wine when he was awaiting the verdict of the medical tribunal in 1992, on several charges of medical malpracrice (two of which were found proven), and the case of fraud (for which he was struck off the medical register, never to be re-instated) He only mentioned the wine after he'd read Monika's statements in Electric Gypsy that they drank some wine that evening and that they were in the habit of drinking it regulary. And more importantly that Monika had accused the Doctor in charge (ie him) of (a further charge of) malpractice in failing to perform a tracheotomy.

No wine, never mind the large amount he claimed, had hitherto or has subsequently been mentioned by anyone else in connection with his death, including the other two doctors, ambulance men, police, the pathologist or the coroner - only Bannister (a proven liar for personal gain). Given these factors it should be blatantly obvious to all but the most fanatic, gullible conspiracy obsessives, that his story is nothing more than a fabricated, panic stricken attempt at an alibi.

After he had been struck off and after his alibi story was (not surprisingly) ignored in the 1992 re-print of Electric Gypsy [although Stickells’ never-mentioned-before and Mitch’s dodgy twenty year old “memories” of early timings for when they first heard of Jimi’s death or that there was, vaguely, “trouble with Jimi at the hotel” (Stickells). Mitch’s statement differing significantly from his only two years earlier 1990 statement, were included. These look suspiciously like they may be misguided attempts to back up Kathy's claim that Monika was extremely tardy in calling the ambulance, they are more likely dodgy aquired memories from listening to reports of others dodgy statements that were given 2nd hand by Kathy and others that appear to be an attempt highlight Monika as a liar prior to her defamation court case. We have yet to hear or see any evidence of the actual interviews, the main witness to these being a woman that Kathy describes as a fairly convincing liar herself!].

Bannister finally got to go public with his ‘masses of red wine alibi’ in 1993, in the London Times. It’s an obviously blatant attempt by him to ‘clean up’ Monika’s allegations, before his later appeal. He gives no indication in any of his statements that he suspects foul play Apart from the tracheotomy alibi, only implying that that’s what can happen if you’re a red wine guzzler, ie he only had himself to blame, it wasn’t my fault.
He then described the scene in gorier terms with Hendrix being naked, and focusing entirely on his tracheotomy alibi, ie the red wine, leaving out the former “and gastric contents”, and "sedatives". He now adds that he thinks Hendrix was naked apart from “something ... - whether it was a towel or a jumper around his neck -. That was saturated in red wine.” No one else mentions him being naked, (or anything being around his neck), in fact the opposite, that he was fully clothed;-). By 2009 he was saying Hendrix was wearing a shirt "soaked in red wine" (ie for all to see), no mention of him being naked with a towel round his neck;)

Firstly the mysterious “memory women” Lawrence (seller of empty cigarette packets allegedly used by Jimi), jumped on the Bannister ‘red wine’ story by claiming in 2006 that she, uniquely, had wrung an (unwitnessed, unrecorded) confession out of Monika, shortly before her (convenient) suicide. That it was her who poured the red wine down his throat because he looked “untidy” AH-HA-HA-HA! Can these “confessions” get any more mental! Then Tappy’s almost as bizarre 2009 “confession” story that Mike and accomplices “stuffed” a handful of tablets down his throat [Vesparax are hard, quite large & oblong] and then poured “bottles” of red wine down after them into his windpipe. [A patently ludicrous story, the renowned pathologist Teare found no signs of struggle or red wine, and especially when Tappy’s long time business associate (they worked together from 1964 onwards), Bob Levine, who contributed to the book made it known that it was bullshit and tells that when he confronted Tappy for his lies, was given the excuse that he needed a hook to sell his book.]
On publication of this travesty, Bannister was then wheeled out to give a, hardly ethusiastic, endorsement that “it was possible” that he had been murdered as per Tappy’s claim. But at the same time claimed the man he treated was unusually tall, whereas Hendrix was only 5' 11''
The Times highlighted that he had been struck off for fraud, ie strongly implying that his testimony was dubious to say the least.
No doubt at least one conspiracy fanatic, will claim the large discrepancies in the two “confessions” were part of some ridiculously convoluted COINTELPRO trick (or other related nonsense, attempting to twist this, in Stalinist, 1984, like manner, into a verification) to throw off further investigation and hide that he was “waterboarded” (a slow, very messy method of torture requiring restraint and designed to make the victim ‘spill the beans,’ not to kill them, a pointless and incriminating exercise in this case) to death with red wine by “a death squad” – bonkers!

Horizon
07-03-11, 03:16 AM
He now adds that he thinks Hendrix was naked apart from “something ... - whether it was a towel or a jumper around his neck -. That was saturated in red wine.” No one else mentions him being naked, (or anything being around his neck), in fact the opposite, that he was fully clothed;-).

Jimi is wearing a scarf around his neck in the pictures taken by Monika in the garden of the Samarkand so maybe he was still wearing it when he got back to the apartment later that night?

purple jim
07-03-11, 03:59 AM
^ Bannister had plenty of time to have consulted books on Jimi featuring the Samarkand garden photos and then add this little detail to give his story more credibility.

stplsd
07-03-11, 04:42 AM
^
The point is not whether it was a towel, or whatever. The point is, why would Bannister mention he was naked with a filthy bit of cloth round his neck, ie totally exposed apart from this sodden rag? His only purpose can have been to add to his degrading of Hendrix' image as compared to own his shining self (he obviously still hasn't grasped the concept of medical ethics, no wonder he wasn't re-instated;)). It's blatantly obvious, but not as important as his implication that Hendrix had an alcohol problem, guzzled red wine and therefore only had himself to blame. Not to mention his earlier implication in his letter to Shapiro that the sleeping tablets he had taken were of minor importance and were "sedatives" he was "using" possibly for kicks

manfree
07-03-11, 07:52 AM
post1

Scrum Drum
07-03-11, 02:23 PM
Have you actually heard a tape of that interview? In what actual way did she moan? It could have been like "Oh my God you got it all so wrong" or "Noo, I've had enought of all this". It would rather reveal her disconfort at remembering that terrible morning and the fact that she let him die (or killed him herself).
Just a phrase in Lawrence's book and you interpret it as an irrefutable confession that she watched thugs waterboard Jimi! Utterly bonkers.



Sharon Lawrence - Jimi Hendrix The Intimate Story Of A Betrayed Musical Legend - Pages 263-264:




In 1996 Monika Dannemann telephoned me for the final time. I felt instantly furious when I picked up the telephone and heard her softly say "It's Monika." How can anyone manage to put sadness behind when there's always some creep unexpectedly bringing it all back into focus? What could she possibly want now? Had she forgotten the legal warning she'd instructed her solicitors to issue? How could she possibly think I would consider her a friend? She started in once more pushing her desire that I should "come and visit... I really need to talk to you. Can you come next week?

I couldn't believe my ears. I'd had enough of her and I let loose. "I don't want to ever see or speak to you again. You've told too many lies through too many years. How can you possibly believe I would want to be your friend?

She began to stammer at the vehemence of my tone. "Oh, is this a b b-bad time to t t-talk?"

I felt somehow that things had gone terribly wrong for Monika and that she was in some kind of trouble. But I didn't care, and I didn't want details. "You helped to kill a friend of mine. You showed no respect to Jimi Hendrix. He lay there in layers of his own vomit for hours and you let him die."

I could hear myself yelling into the telephone, and I felt shocked by my own anger. You could have called a doctor. An ambulance. The police. The hotel manager. But you didn't. The very next morning, you told me what happened, but you didn't tell me everything! When he was choking, gasping for breath, did you pour red wine down his throat?

There was a long pause. I took a stab at something I'd discussed with Jack Meehan after his conversation with the coroner and had subsequently puzzled over for years. "I know you did, I said."

"It was all untidy. He was messy. I thought it would help," Monika haltingly explained. I could just imagine her running off to wash her hands because the dying man was "untidy".

"You made it all worse."

She let out a series of hysterical shrieks, but she did not deny my words. I kept at her. "You could have gotten help that would have saved him. But you made a choice, and you have been lying about all of it ever since." Monika was sobbing now, but she managed to interrupt her sobs to say, "Stop! You're going to give me a heart attack."

"That's an impossibility!" I yelled. "You have no heart. No conscience. You barely knew Jimi Hendrix and you let him die."

"No!"

"You and your sick charade," I said, quieting down. I had never spoken to another human being like that before.

She was quiet too. The sobs had vanished.

"Don't you ever telephone me or contact me in any way ever again. You are a cruel and terrible person. And a goddamned liar!"

Monika Dannemann moaned into my ear on the telephone; it was terrible to hear. Finally she said, "I am sorry. Believe me, I am sorry." I couldn't listen to another word. I hung up and two days later I took the advice of friends and changed my phone number.




Sharon didn't realize she had made a critical mistake and misinterpreted the evidence. In a way Monika was as much a victim as Jimi was. Sharon didn't realize the golden opportunity she had to be the only person to get Monika to talk. She should have seized upon the request and befriended Monika. Monika was reaching out to her. Sharon had a golden chance to earn Monika's trust and get the real story from her mouth. Monika was reaching-out and Sharon slammed the door in her face.

What Sharon doesn't realize above is that Monika was making a quick excuse about tidying Jimi up with wine. If Sharon had a better grasp of the evidence she would realize Jimi was never tidy-ed up and was covered in unwashed vomit. What this shows is when Monika made quick excuses about washing Jimi with wine she was doing so to divert attention from the fact Jimi had been murdered with wine. There was obviously no washing with wine. Sharon took Monika literally and didn't realize she was lying. Sharon thought she had uncovered a scandalous revelation of Monika admitting she had poured wine into a choking, dying Hendrix. She missed a subtle clue though. Monika protested loudly "NO!" What Sharon failed to interpret was that indeed Monika hadn't poured wine into Jimi, other people had. Monika knew it but couldn't tell the whole story. When Sharon says Monika didn't deny it she doesn't understand that Monika couldn't admit the whole thing so she didn't necessarily deny it but didn't tell the real reason either. That's why she protested "NO!". It's also why she was so strong in defending herself legally because she knew she wasn't exactly guilty of what people were accusing her of but couldn't tell why.

It's amazing people don't see the simple fact that Monika is claiming she cleaned Jimi up with wine but any simple look at the scene would show that Jimi wasn't cleaned-up and was covered in grotesque amounts of vomit. That means Monika was lying about cleaning-up Jimi with wine. Well, why would she do that? And the answer is because she knew the wine had been used to murder Hendrix and needed an excuse for it.

MourningStar
07-03-11, 02:38 PM
^
OK - So, let's suppose Lawrence 'was all ears' or that you were Lawrence. It does not mean that whatever Danneman would say would be the truth. A deathbed confession might have more credibility, but I'm not aware of one or of any suicide note.

purple jim
07-03-11, 03:07 PM
Thanks for posting the extract from the Lawrence book SD. I don't agree with your conclusion but what a devious woman Danneman was.

ilovejimi
07-03-11, 03:16 PM
^ Scrum arnt you worried that Jimi's killers will seek you out for eposing THE FACTS? ;)

stplsd
07-03-11, 04:47 PM
Sharon Lawrence - Jimi Hendrix The Intimate Story Of A Betrayed Musical Legend - Pages 263-264:.

At last, an accurate quote from SD!
Pity about the piece you chose though, it's a main contender for the biggest load of patently ridiculous twaddle ever printed about Hendrix.

MourningStar
07-03-11, 04:57 PM
At last, an accurate quote! Pity it's the biggest load of ridiculous twaddle printed about Hendrix.Oh? Looks like Bannister's been bumped.

stplsd
07-03-11, 05:06 PM
Oh? Looks like Bannister's been bumped.

He's in a class of his own

Scrum Drum
07-03-11, 06:41 PM
I think what is fairly obvious here is that deniers can't answer reasonable points of evidence. They refuse to confront the fact that Monika's claim that she washed vomit off Jimi with wine doesn't match the condition Jimi was found in. Jimi was found covered in grotesque amounts of vomit that hadn't been washed-off. There's no person who would start to clean vomit off Jimi and then stop and leave Jimi covered in the amounts of vomit he was covered-in. Any person in Monika's position who claimed to be cleaning-up the "untidy mess" Jimi was covered in would have continued and gotten the mess off Jimi they claimed to be cleaning-off. The reason deniers refuse to answer this is because they know they can't confront it and still maintain their position at the same time. That in itself is proof of its strength as evidence. Only people not interested in seeking the truth would think they were getting away with ignoring this.

What becomes very obvious is that Monika never washed any vomit off Jimi. If she had she never would have left Jimi with so much vomit covering him. Besides, who cleans vomit off a dying person with wine??? Especially when warm water, soap, and towel were just as nearby in the small flat. So why did Monika lie about washing Jimi's face with wine? Obviously because she knew she had no excuse for it so she thought up the first excuse she could. Monika knew Jimi had been murdered with wine so she diverted Sharon's question by quickly saying she wiped some vomit off Jimi with wine to explain it. A quick look at the body, however, would show no effort was made to clean vomit off Jimi.

Where this really becomes obvious is when you involve Bannister's witnessing. There's no way the "bottles worth" of wine found in Jimi and his lungs was anything that accidentally entered Jimi during any cursory face washing. The amounts Bannister witnessed were too great to be explained this way. There's no way that Monika's claimed action of washing some vomit off Jimi's face with wine would resulting in the massive flooding of the lungs Bannister witnessed. Also, forensically and pathologically speaking, the drowning in wine is what caused the vomiting. And since Jimi was killed by being drowned in wine, which then induced the vomiting, that means that any washing of vomit was well after the initial cause of death - which means the face washing didn't kill Jimi. These are simple and clear forensics that were simply never processed by the British Government. Deniers just ignore them.

It's proof of murder fellows...

MourningStar
07-03-11, 07:18 PM
Edit: Could a mod add the "Other (explain below)" option to the poll? ThanksI'm guessing mind you, but I think that the poll cannot be modified or your request would have been accomplished by now. That or the procedure to do it is currently unkown. However, I do know that you can create a new post and poll, then a mod can move all these posts into it, then delete the old thread. This I know has been done before.

purple jim
07-04-11, 01:58 AM
I think what is fairly obvious here is that deniers can't answer reasonable points of evidence. They refuse to confront the fact that Monika's claim that she washed vomit off Jimi with wine doesn't match the condition Jimi was found in.

So in your tiny world, people only vomit ONCE? She might have made a pathetic gesture of wiping his face, left the room for a second, while Jimi vomitted again and again and again...


Where this really becomes obvious is when you involve Bannister's witnessing. There's no way the "bottles worth" of wine found in Jimi and his lungs was anything that accidentally entered Jimi during any cursory face washing.

We keep telling you that here weren't "bottles of wine" in Jimi's lungs! That was Bannister's invention (or memory of another case).

stplsd
07-04-11, 05:43 AM
reasonable points of evidence
To a kangaroo court maybe. "I think what is fairly obvious here is" that conspiracy waterboarders will accept any obvious twaddle written, twisting and turning the conflicting "stories" in an intellect, medical science and logic defying manner, until, ‘Hey Presto!’ they “think” it fits their waterboarding theory.
"They refuse to confront the fact that" Lawrence's claim that Monika confessed to her that she poured red wine down Jimi's throat because he looked "untidy" and that this killed him, is seen as patently ridiculous twaddle by any “people who are smart". It's even more ridiculous than Tappy Wright's confession claim (now utterly discredited, as if it wasn't already obvious rubbish to anyone with half a brain) and utterly conflicts with it, as does Tappy's and their just as ridiculous claim that he was waterboarded to death by a specially trained "death squad". And Bannister's implication, in his tracheotomy alibi (which the other two have clearly “used”), that he drowned due to guzzling too much wine too quickly in a greedy fashion.

Only people not interested in seeking the truth...
...and who are obviously only interested in promoting their bizarre "waterboarding" conspiracy theory...
...would think they were getting away with ignoring......everything that contradicts it.

Obviously because she knew she had no excuse for it so she thought up the first excuse she could. Monika knew Jimi had been murdered with wine so she diverted Sharon's question by quickly saying she wiped some vomit off Jimi with wine to explain it. .
Why would she confess to killing him by pouring wine down his throat – as Lawrence actually claims, (but at the same time not confess to what "actually happened" – as the waterboarders see it) to a woman she hardly knew, if at all (the only evidence that Lawrence ever met her or spoke to her is Lawrence - how convenient ), for no good reason, to a woman who was very hostile to her.

The amounts Bannister witnessed were too great to be explained this way.
Here we go again. Bannister's story is nothing more than a stark staringly obvious, deceitful and inept attempt by Bannister to cover his arse over a further charge of malpractice on top of the several he was already facing at the time (not to menton the fraud, which was seen by the first and succeeding tribunals as serious enough for him to have been struck off the medical register permanently, despite his several attempts over the years to be re-instated) Not to mention that both of these ridiculous, contradictory "wine confessions" were only made after the "confessors" were dead, were the main selling 'hook' in almost unreadable guff by people who have no new stories of interest and who obviously barely ever met the man.

It's proof of murder
It’s not “proof” of anything (apart from how gullible some "authors" think their perceived market is). No matter how logic defyingly it’s twisted, at, a very charitable, best it’s hearsay
All conspiracy waterboarders have as "evidence" for their fantasy is Bannister's “alibi” and those two completly ridiculous and contradictory "confessions" based on it, used to sell rubbish books. No one else who was actually there including the other two doctors, the ambulance men, the hospital admissions porter, the policemen, the roadies, Burdon, Alvenia, Monika, Slater, or anyone else claiming to be a witness to that day in their several statements and publications has ever mentioned wine in connection with his death, or that he was other than fully clothed.
The entire "conspiracy"/murder (except the wineless scenario where Monika is solely guilty for, somehow, "giving him" the tablets and/or not phoning the ambulance in time) is based on Bannister's 1992 transparently false alibi against malpractice story, obviously conjured up in panic when he was awaiting the tribunal's verdict for other malpractices and FRAUD.
You either believe Bannister’s wine story and the intellect and medical science defying, illogical mangling of this and the two subsequent, contradictory “confession” stories to fit the “waterboarding by “death squad” “theory”. Or you don’t - and that’s the end of that “theory” for you.
That’s the bottom line. No amount of further tedious reams of verbose juggling by conspiracy waterboarders are going to change that, "fellows".

stplsd
07-04-11, 08:10 AM
By the way KD, what's happening on the Musician mag front, did you find it? It won't change anything (according to the two authors that have read it: Fairchild, who claims the main points as plagiarised from his own articles and Peter Nelson, who based his account on it and quotes liberally from it), but it would still be interesting to have a read of it:)

Ezy Rider
07-04-11, 08:41 AM
In my very simplistic understanding of the "waterboarding"-theory, if it is possible to understand it at all, it seems that the theory is not so much based on "evidence" as on a whole series of deductions, inferences, premises etc in order to prove it. It may therefore seem clear if one can wholeheartedly "believe" all these reasonings but without any evidence, it is not possible to convince anybody of the "waterboarding"-theory.

What I understand thus far would look like something as the following:

1) Bannister claims Hendrix was drowned in wine

2) Tappy Wright claims there was a hit squad who waterboarded Hendrix

|

|

|

10) Hendrix was murdered by his manager Jeffery for the insurance money

11) Jefferey worked for the CIA/MI5

12) Danneman was a plant by Jefferey/CIA/MI5

13) conclusion: Hendrix was killed by the CIA/MI5 and some others.

Between steps 2 and 10 is a series of assumptions (pills, wine, MD, autopsy report etc, mostly all the stuff nobody knows for certain) that are "interpreted" in a certain way (the deductive reasoning mentioned above) that would make it sound "logical" that steps 10 to 13 are also valid inferences.

Well, as anyone can see, there are some big problems in this line of thinking. Not only are many of the premises unfounded (eg the first one on Bannister), many of the reasoning takes place in some very foggy part of the brain. If evidence accompanying each step could be given, the whole theory would of course be more sound but at this point I can only see a bunch of unfounded and unconnected claims and events.

dino77
07-04-11, 10:14 AM
In my very simplistic understanding of the "waterboarding"-theory, if it is possible to understand it at all, it seems that the theory is not so much based on "evidence" as on a whole series of deductions, inferences, premises etc in order to prove it. It may therefore seem clear if one can wholeheartedly "believe" all these reasonings but without any evidence, it is not possible to convince anybody of the "waterboarding"-theory.

What I understand thus far would look like something as the following:

1) Bannister claims Hendrix was drowned in wine

2) Tappy Wright claims there was a hit squad who waterboarded Hendrix

|

|

|

10) Hendrix was murdered by his manager Jeffery for the insurance money

11) Jefferey worked for the CIA/MI5

12) Danneman was a plant by Jefferey/CIA/MI5

13) conclusion: Hendrix was killed by the CIA/MI5 and some others.

Between steps 2 and 10 is a series of assumptions (pills, wine, MD, autopsy report etc, mostly all the stuff nobody knows for certain) that are "interpreted" in a certain way (the deductive reasoning mentioned above) that would make it sound "logical" that steps 10 to 13 are also valid inferences.

Well, as anyone can see, there are some big problems in this line of thinking. Not only are many of the premises unfounded (eg the first one on Bannister), many of the reasoning takes place in some very foggy part of the brain. If evidence accompanying each step could be given, the whole theory would of course be more sound but at this point I can only see a bunch of unfounded and unconnected claims and events.

Good post - that's the "murder conspiracy" in a nutshell. It does not seem overly simplistic at all. The whole conspiracy falls (or stands, if mr Bannister one days provides some bullet-proof evidence of his account) on assumption number 1.

You have to admire Mike Jeffery's stamina. Jeffery must have been quite the multi-tasker, being a CIA agent at the same time as handling the biggest star in rock. :D

stplsd
07-04-11, 11:37 AM
Well, as anyone can see, there are some big problems in this line of thinking.

A major one being 3) Tappy only claimed that Mike said "I was in London... together with some old friends from 'up North' [ie Newcastle] we... got a handful of pills and stuffed them into his mouth, then we poured a few bottles of red wine deep into his windpipe." He tells it as a casual and brutal force feeding by Mike personally and a few thugs. Not that an organised "death squad", trained in the slow, messy, 'waterboarding' torture technique carried it out. The only motive money. No hint that it was because of his political utterances. No hint of the "Mafia," FBI or CIA, MI5 and neccessarily various other UK official bodies.


In my very simplistic understanding of the "waterboarding"-theory, if it is possible to understand it at all, it seems that the theory is not so much based on "evidence"

Without Bannister's 1992 wine story it doesn't exist, everything else follows it, no "masses of red wine," no conspiracy to murder theory, no murder by red wine.

stplsd
07-04-11, 11:47 AM
The whole conspiracy [...] stands, if mr Bannister one days provides some bullet-proof evidence of his account) on assumption number 1.

No. The whole conspiracy does not "stand" if evidence of Hendrix having "drowned" (ie "choked" in the normal description of someone that is not immersed in liquid) on red wine turns up. It rather, can only begin if. . . And that is not a possibility in the real world. If Bannister's masses of red wine cannot be shown to have existed beyond reasonable doubt there is no start to the "theory", everything else that depends on it falls.

goose334
07-04-11, 11:56 AM
one must be careful
http://www.23ae.com/files/goldendawn.pdf

dino77
07-04-11, 11:59 AM
No. The whole conspiracy does not "stand" if evidence of Hendrix having "drowned" (ie "choked" in the normal description of someone that is not immersed in liquid) on red wine turns up. It rather, can only begin if. . . And that is not a possibility in the real world. If Bannister's masses of red wine cannot be shown to have existed beyond reasonable doubt there is no start to the "theory", everything else that depends on it falls.


Yup, that's exactly what I meant, thanks.

Scrum Drum
07-04-11, 12:53 PM
Deniers protest too much. It's plain dishonest to try to conflate Bannister's legal problems with his witnessing of the wine. You should ignore anyone who suggests that because they are inventing something in order to cloud the issue. There's a simple thing here that needs to be admitted. Bannister witnessed the wine. He had no reason to invent it or lie about it and it came about naturally after Bannister responded to one of Monika's lies. Anyone who says Bannister invented the wine in order to save himself from legal problems is a knowing prevaricator and should be ignored. They are sophist/semantic spider web spinners who want us to make the mistake of entertaining their dishonest arguments in order to mire the evidence in the quagmire they keep trying to drag it down into. Smart people will realize Bannister didn't have to invent any wine to save his reputation since Siefert and the attendants already said Jimi was dead. What this suggests is that Bannister thought to himself "hmm, I'm in trouble I better invent this crazy wine story to save me". The preposterousness of this should be obvious to most normal people (not desperately interested in denial). The more rhetorical bluster these people answer with the more they expose their need to overcome the facts they are denying.


Once Monika admitted that wine was applied to Jimi it corroborates Bannister's wine witnessing. Even better, Monika admitted keeping one of the wine bottles. Since this controversy has been out there long enough for those present to attest to the status of the wine bottles, yet they haven't come forward to tell us what condition they were in, that speaks for itself. The denier's arguments are obvious from their own form. They have the hubris to put themselves before people who were actually there and say that ALL the witnesses were uncredible and liars with some mitigating agenda. You can tell the dishonest semantic/sophist nature of their arguments just by looking at them. They give themselves away because they protest way too much and have created a denial history corpus completely of their own invention that they then refer to. Their answers are visibly trivial and visibly seek to evade the true facts. What they want to do is remove the discussion into their denial contrivances and keep it there. But anyone can see their arguments are reactionary and dwell mostly in the frivolous.

So if we get back to reality and try to ignore this deliberate intellectual obstruction, Bannister witnessed the wine as Monika and all other honest evidence points to. Repeating "Bannister never witnessed any wine" over and over again won't make this go away. Bannister had a firm memory because the shock of later learning who his patient was locked the memory into his mind. The large scarf seen around Jimi's neck in Monika's photos was most-likely the same towel-like item Bannister witnessed soaked in wine. Deniers, desperate to avoid this obvious evidence, will say Bannister invented it in order to reduce the level of conversation. Funny how Bannister happened to nail the exact item of clothing Jimi was last seen wearing in his 'invention'. But, heck, we'll just raise the level of noise to avoid the obvious. Every time we see obvious evidence we'll just reduce the conversation to lesser denials. The sexiness of the game is what's fun here. Jimi, he can just flap out in the wind murdered. Or we can just un-murder him with denials...

MourningStar
07-04-11, 01:00 PM
2) Tappy Wright claims there was a hit squad who waterboarded Hendrix|

|

|

10) Hendrix was murdered by his manager Jeffery for the insurance money
Actually, if you are going to list 'claims' that Jimi was murdered, it would be a larger list. And I differ as to MJ doing it for insurance money. It was a heavier scene and Hendrix, whenever the legal process to fire MJ and aquire new management took place, would expose all the illegalities of MJ's financial portfolio and in so doing reveal these covert connections/operations, a motive much more logical than mere insurance money.

Finally, a 'murder' scenario can exist without Bannister and wine. Think about it.

Scrum Drum
07-04-11, 01:14 PM
So in your tiny world, people only vomit ONCE? She might have made a pathetic gesture of wiping his face, left the room for a second, while Jimi vomitted again and again and again...


The excuse-making nature of your replies is obvious. If Monika wiped Jimi's face of vomit because she was repulsed by the untidy-ness of Jimi's state, as she said, then why did she leave Jimi covered in grotesque amounts of vomit? Your supposition suggests Monika cleaned a small amount of vomit but then left a huge ugly amount of vomit untouched for hours in front of other people cleaning the flat. Your entries once again blithely grind against the obvious and conspicuously fail to answer the greater questions. No, what you suggest doesn't make sense and grinds against the facts. Monika was obviously making up a quick excuse for the wine that was inherently contradictory in comparison to the evidence. If Monika was concerned about Jimi's messiness then she has no excuse for leaving Jimi in the state the attendants found him in. She's lying. And you're reaching for excuses around the obvious.




We keep telling you that here weren't "bottles of wine" in Jimi's lungs! That was Bannister's invention (or memory of another case).


I trust a trained medical doctor over internet posters. One who was actually there and treated Jimi Hendrix. Your wild doctor Bannister making-up crazy wine stories is obvious for what it is. I think some people are so driven by denial of the obvious that they actually delude themselves into believing this. Bannister recalled the unusual amounts of wine he suctioned from Jimi Hendrix the morning of September 18th 1970. Simple as that. Deny it if you want.

stplsd
07-04-11, 01:26 PM
Finally, a 'murder' scenario can exist without Bannister and wine. Think about it.

We know that. We are talking about the alleged murder using red wine, the only method discussed by "conspiracy theorists" here and which they claim was administered using the slow, messy "waterboard" torture technique, by or in associaton with the FBI, and failing that anyone they can drag in as a suspect to fit the bill, as they see it. Monika because she was there. Jeffery being dragged in because they claim he benefitted from an alleged insurance policy. Though they haven't explained why he would need to be involved.

goose334
07-04-11, 01:39 PM
"Tappy's" statement. 2009

"I was in London the night of Jimi's death and together with some old friends...we went round to Monika's [Jimi's girlfriend] hotel room, got a handful of pills and stuffed them into his mouth...then poured a few bottles of red wine deep into his windpipe. I had to do it. Jimi was worth much more to me dead than alive. That son of a bitch was going to leave me. If I lost him, I'd lose everything."
- Mike Jeffery (allegedly)

The roadie claims Mike Jeffery said he'd taken out a life insurance policy on Hendrix worth $2 million (£1.2 million), with Jeffery as beneficiary. Jimi was murdered in September 1970 because, says the roadie, three months later, in December 1970, Mike Jeffery's management contract with Hendrix was due to expire and Jimi planned to hire a different manager.
To people familiar with Jimi's story, three red flags jump out from these claims:
1) Mike Jeffery wasn't "in London," he was in Spain when Jimi died in London on September 18, 1970.

"There was a freak storm across Majorca [Spain] and all the phone lines were down. Somebody told Mike that Jimi had been trying to phone him. The first call that got through was to say Jimi was dead. Mike was terribly upset at the thought of Jimi not being able to get through to him." - Trixie Sullivan, secretary/assistant for Mike Jeffery

2) Motive: "in December 1970, Mike Jeffery's management contract with Hendrix was due to expire." Wrong. The Hendrix/Jeffery management contract was not due to expire until 1972, and beyond that Jimi & Jeffery shared ownership interests in a recording studio, as well as film contract commitments well into the '70s. In 1970 imminent contract expiration was no motive for Jeffery to kill Jimi.
3) Motive: "Jeffery had taken out a life insurance policy on Hendrix." Wrong. The only insurance policy on Jimi's life was taken out by his American record company, Warner Bros.

"Jeffery wanted a 'key-man' insurance policy that - should one partner die - made one million dollars available to either partner to buy out the full interest in the company." - Jim Marron, Hendrix/Jeffery business associate

"When we were in Hawaii filming Rainbow Bridge (August 1970, a month prior to Jimi's death), Jeffery was trying to get Jimi to sign a million-dollar insurance policy. I had bad feelings about it and warned Jimi not to sign. I then later confronted Jimi in Oahu, asking if he had signed any agreements, and he said, 'Just some performance contracts that I was behind on.' I was relieved, but I still warned him to look out for it."

- Bob Levine - assistant to Mike Jeffery


Mike Jeffery was in no position to benefit from Jimi's death. Hendrix left no will, his death meant his father then controlled all "product."
John Hillman, a British solicitor who specialized in international tax laws, set up an offshore tax haven company called Yameta in the Bahamas for Mike Jeffery. "Part of Jeffery's trouble," observed Hillman, "was that he was untidy. He did a whole lot of side deals…He did divert funds, there's no question of that, but that doesn't necessarily mean he stole anything."

I'd say the best testimony comes from the ambulance workers

John Saua was one of the ambulance crew (2 men) who answered the call to 22 Landsdowne Crescent, London on the 18th September 1970. The call came in at 11:18 A.M. They arrived at 11:27 AM. John had only worked with Reg Jones for one month, as Reg Jones' regular partner was in the hospital. John left that position shortly afterword and had no contact with Reg Jones since, nor were they particularly good mates at the time, being of different age groups. John still is an ambulance man.

John Saua's Statement:


Well, I remember we had a hell of a time trying to suck him out, I mean the vomit was dry and there was a hell of a lot of it. The aspirators in those days were all right, but not like you have today. They couldn't shift that lot.
We knew it was hopeless. There was no pulse, no respiration. We got down to the flat and there was nobody but the body on the bed, we had to radio for the police from the van, and we couldn't touch anything in the flat. As I say we knew he was gone, he was on top of the bed dressed, but I didn't recognize him. I don't know if any anybody would've recognized him. His own mother wouldn't have recognized him. He was in a pool of vomit, it was everywhere.
But we are not doctors and it's our job to keep trying till we get them to the hospital. We can't proclaim anyone dead...so as soon as the police arrived we were off. I was in the back with Jimi, Reg Jones drove. When we moved him the gasses were gurgling. You get that when someone has died, it wasn't too pleasant. The vomit was all the way down. We couldn't have got an airway down. He was flat on his back when we got there. It's a shame he wasn't on his side because he might have pulled through.


Questions for John Saua:


Q: Did you sit Jimi up in the ambulance?
A: Of course not, but I really kept on trying to do what I could for him even though we knew it was useless. I was really sorry there was nothing we could do to help.
Q: Why have you never talked to the press or come forward?
A: What do you mean come forward? I would never talk to the press, well you can't in our job. We sign a conditions of service agreement. If we go into a building of national security, or a member of the royal family or a celebrity, we can't talk about it, and quite right too. No one has ever asked me about it before anyway.
{John was then shown the account in the bio "Electric Gypsy" regarding Jimi's death.}
A: Well that's fiction isn't it? What a load of old cobblers!
Q: Don't you remember this girl (Monika Dannemann)?
A: No.
Q: Surely you remember this girl. Blond hair and a German accent.
A: Sorry, doesn't jar anything or ring any bells with me.
Q: Did you speak to anyone on your way to the hospital?
A: Just the police before we left. A small crowd may have gathered. I can't remember if some one asked what was happening, but you always get a crowd round an ambulance. It's an unfortunate fact.
Q: Did anyone ride along to the hospital with you?
A: No, of course not, like who?



Reg Jones was the other member of the ambulance crew who responded to a "possible O.D." call at the 22 Landsowne crescent basement flat on the 18th of September 1970. He had worked for over 20 years as an ambulance man and has the highest reputation among his colleagues.



Reg Jones' Statement:


Well it was horrific. We arrived at the flat and the door was flung wide open. Nobody about, just the body on the bed. He was covered in vomit. There was tons of it all over the pillow, black and brown it was. His airways was completely blocked all the way down. His tongue had fallen back you see. The room at first was dark...we had to pull the curtains.
Well we had to get the police. We only had an empty flat, so John Saua ran up and radioed and got the aspirator too. We felt for any pulse between his shoulders, pinched his earlobes and nose, showed a light in his eyes, but there was no response at all. I knew he was dead as soon as I walked in the room. You get a feel for it, I can't explain, but you do and I knew he was dead.
Once the police arrived, which seemed like no time at all, we got him off to the hospital as quick as we could. We just kept trying. My shirt was wringing wet. The ambulances in them days, they wasn't equipped like they are now. We had them crazy wadhams (a type of ambulance) in them days, awful they was.
We took him to St. Mary Abbotts, they don't have a casualty ward now, but in them days they did. That was our designated hospital for the day. There was a "bed state"* at St. Charles. You found out at the beginning of your shift what your designated hospital was - St. Mary's was the designated that day.
[*NOTE: A "bed state" meant that the casualty ward for a particular hospital was not open on a particular day - either through staffing or lack of beds, the designated hospital was the place the injured, or ill, would receive the fastest and most comprehensive care. Just to make sure the emergency services remembered, large highly visible colored disks were placed at the casualty entrance. Red was for closed and green meant open. St. Charles was marginally closer, but there was a "bed state" and, as Reg Jones said, St. Mary's was the designated casualty ward that day.]


Questions for Reg Jones:

Q: Did any one come along in the Ambulance with you?
A: No. John Saua was with Jimi, I didn't know he was Jimi Hendrix, bit out of my age group, luv. When we got him to the hospital, full lights and sirens, we had to clean the ambulance out, it was really a mess, his bowels and bladder, all that goes when you're dead. That flat must have needed a good cleaning too.
Q: Did you sit him up in the ambulance?
A: Sit him up! No luv, you don't sit people up when they've choked. Them steps up the flat was steep, and you had a natural incline on the way up, but no, he wasn't sat up.
Q: Did you see or talk to anyone in the flat or on the way?
A: Just the police and the hospital staff.
Q: What about the German girl?
A: What German Girl? We didn't talk to no one but the police, and then at the hospital.
Q: This is a bit confusing - look at this (shown the account in the "Electric Gypsy" bio:
A: Well that's just crazy that is. I wouldn't know that girl if she was living next door to me. I've never seen her before. That's wicked that is. I've lived long enough to know silly tongues will wag, but that is wicked. She wasn't there, there was no one there.
Q: Have you ever had a situation like this before or since?
A: Well no, that's why I can remember it quite well, just the body and no one around


Ian Smith was one of a pair of police officers attached to Netting Dale police station, responding to a call from ambulance H. Q. to Netting Dale to go to 22 Landsdowne Crescent, London, Samarkand Hotel. It took them about two minutes to arrive (probably less) as the station was just behind Landsdowne Crescent and they were on their way out the door to start their shift.

Ian Smith's Statement: We went to a basement flat at Landsdowne Crescent. The ambulance men were there, but Jimi was dead. It wasn't very pleasant. They had to take some of the bedding and wrapped it around his body as there was a lot of mess. There was really nothing they could do for him. I watched them put him in the ambulance and go off.

Questions for Ian Smith: Q: Was there anyone with them (the ambulance men)?
A: No, I remember quite clearly the doors of the ambulance shutting on the crew and Jimi.
Q: Were you aware of the fact that he was Jimi Hendrix?
A: No, I hadn't a clue who he was. We really answered a lot of calls like that in those days.
Q: Was there anyone in the flat besides Jimi and the ambulance men?
A: No we just shut the door after they left to close up the flat.
Q: Could you just read this account (shown "Electric Gypsy")?
A: (laughs) Well, that's not how I remember things. If she'd been in the flat they would have never called us to come in. They could have just taken him off, but in the circumstances, you know - just the body. Well they I radioed their control to get us in. Also he would have been identified - nobody knew who he was.



Dr. Martin Seifert was one of the casualty doctors who attended to Jimi Hendrix on the 18th of September 1970, at St. Mary Abbotts Hospital, where he was the Medical Registrar. He was one of a team of three doctors. Today he is an eminent Rheumatologist (a doctor who deals with painful conditions of the joints and muscles).


Dr. Martin Seifert's Statement:
Jimi was rushed into the re-sus room. He was put on a monitor, but it was flat. I pounded his heart a couple of times, but there was no point in doing anything else, as he was dead.
I vaguely remember the clothes being flamboyant, but not too well because that isn't what you concentrate on, and there was a good bit of mess.
I never spoke to, or saw, anyone about Jimi - No woman in admissions. No nurse went out to say we'd revived him because we didn't - That just never happened. We didn't work on him anything like an hour, just a few minutes - He was dead. After we worked on Jimi - we didn't know he was Jimi Hendrix until later on - I remember just a vague memory of a bit of fuss going on in admissions, but it could have been anything, it was a casualty ward.
After being shown the account in "Electric Gypsy", Dr. Seifert had this to say.
I can't explain that all - It never happened. Who is this girl? No one would have been allowed to look at him or stand over him. That would never have been done. I would have done anything to save him, but it was too late, he was dead.


Mr. Pergolani was working as a waiter at the Samarkand Hotel on September 18th 1970
Mr. Pergolani's Statement:

Jimi was staying in the hotel with Monika, his German girlfriend. I was working here. That day, someone yelled out that Hendrix was dead. The police came. The doctor said he took pills, but the reason for his death was suffocation from his own vomit, because he couldn't move, he was laying on his back. Since then, almost every week, people come here to see where Jimi died.
[NOTE: I would think that by "doctor" he means the ambulance attendants. It's curious that he says. "Someone yelled out that Hendrix was dead." That confirms the attendant's claim, that they knew Jimi was already dead at the scene. It's also interesting to note that he says, "Since then, almost every week, people come here to see where Jimi died."]

Monika Danneman's Statement:
On September 24, 1970, Monika Charlotte Danneman made the following sworn statement:

I have known Jimi Hendrix for the past two years. I met him in Germany and we became friendly and when I came to England this year I got in contact with him and we resumed our relationship. Since Tuesday 15th September, he was living with me at my flat in Landsdowne Crescent. We went out on Wednesday and Thursday to Ronnie Scotts Jazz Club and had a meal and a bottle of wine each evening, and spent the evenings listening to music. On Thursday 17th September we stayed in and I cooked a meal of spaghetti and we talked until about 2am. He then said he had to go somewhere and see some people about his band and I drove him to a house in Great Cumberland place. I asked him if I could go with him, but he said that they were not very nice people. Later about 2:45am, I picked him up there and went home. On our arrival I made a sandwich and we talked until about 7am. He then said he wanted to go to sleep. He took some tablets and we went to bed. I woke up about 11am and saw that Jimi's face was covered in vomit. I tried to wake him, but could not. I called an ambulance and he was taken to the Hospital in Kensington. He never recovered consciousness and later died at 12:45 pm. Prior to going with him to the hospital, I checked my supply of Vesperax sleeping tablets and found that 9 of them were missing. He was very happy and I never heard him talk of killing himself.

[not sure of date for this one]
Stickells and Barrett took Jimi's stuff, like messages. That was funny, that was so strange. They only were interedsted in the messages Jimi had received...I do believe he got poisoned - Monika Dannemann


Doctors and attendants who handled Jimi's body recall him being covered with a large amount of red wine. Yet medical records show his blood alcohol level was 46 mgs when he died, meaning that his system hadn't absorbed a lot of wine: 46 milligrams, when converted to ounces, equals 0.0016 of an ounce - practically nothing. So a lot of wine got into him and then he quickly died before absorbing the alcohol. Heart stops, absorption ceases, and just a small amount of alcohol had time to enter Jimi's blood. So why was a lot of wine spilled all over and around him? He drowned. Was it a forced drowning? Did someone hold him and pour the wine in? Why was his hair, clothes, and bedding covered in so much wine? It's too suspicious.

- James Sedgwick- First Century Press

Scrum Drum
07-04-11, 01:55 PM
Actually, if you are going to list 'claims' that Jimi was murdered, it would be a larger list. And I differ as to MJ doing it for insurance money. It was a heavier scene and Hendrix, whenever the legal process to fire MJ and aquire new management took place, would expose all the illegalities of MJ's financial portfolio and in so doing reveal these covert connections/operations, a motive much more logical than mere insurance money.

Finally, a 'murder' scenario can exist without Bannister and wine. Think about it.


Right, thanks Mourning Star. People like Mourning Star, who show an appreciation of the bigger picture, show an honest understanding of the true facts. Persons whose sole interest is quick denial expose themselves in their willingness to ignore this bigger picture. Just because people are trying to deny the wine doesn't mean the whole mafia, kidnapping, death threat aspect of Jeffery, or his relationship, and its meaning, goes away.

Mourning Star shows shrewd understanding of the real motives above. Jeffery said to Wright "I had to do it, I had no choice" ("Powerful people depend on me being your manager"). I've probably studied intel intrigue a little more than some on this site. A trick they use is called a "limited hang-out". What they do is offer a sacrificial lamb when people get close. Jeffery and his mundane business motive is the limited hang-out in this case. What reinforces this is the pattern of denials that followed in the media with Levine's statement and Meic Steven's red herring. There was no follow-through investigation of Wright's claim because they want people to believe Jeffery killed Hendrix for insurance and then forget about it. That way you'll never seek to find out about the intel Bahamian bank or COINTELPRO motives or the evidence for it. Deniers are like people foolishly playing the naked roles of the play "Hair" on a stage set-up for Shakespeare's Hamlet.

MourningStar
07-04-11, 02:00 PM
Finally, a 'murder' scenario can exist without Bannister and wine. Think about it.We know that. ...Well, why don't the two of you spare us and persue a few of those alternatives? You and SD are like dogs after their own tails and doing it wonderfully!. Oh, I get it. The two of you, mmmm, and maybe a few others, are competing to see how many ways you both can say the exact same thing.

Carry on,
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

MourningStar
07-04-11, 02:04 PM
In 2011 Bob Levine, Wright's long term business associate and Mike Jeffery's assistant manager in N.Y., said he knows that Wright made up these stories to sell his book, that Jeffery didn't have insurance on Hendrix, but that he merely countersigned the Warner Bros. policy that Warner's had taken out as standard practice.All this already posted and discussed. Please review.

goose334
07-04-11, 02:06 PM
All this already posted and discussed. Please review.

sifting through 23 pages of blather is more then my brain can tolerate.

I agree with SD 100% that tappy's testimony was to point the finger at mj.
Hendrix the last 24 hours, tries the same thing.

MourningStar
07-04-11, 02:27 PM
All this already posted and discussed. Please review.sifting through 23 pages of blather is more then my brain can tolerate.oh, give yourself a chance and have a go. It won't 'kill' you and just may keep the 'blather', of which you've just added, to a minimum. (yeah, right Marcos - dream on)

goose334
07-04-11, 02:28 PM
by page 4 my eyes were rolling so hard i thought they were going to pop outta my head


oh, give yourself a chance and have a go. It won't 'kill' you and just may keep the 'blather', of which you've just added, to a minimum. (yeah, right Marcos - dream on)

MourningStar
07-04-11, 02:35 PM
Actually, if you are going to list 'claims' that Jimi was murdered, it would be a larger list. And I differ as to MJ doing it for insurance money. It was a heavier scene and Hendrix, whenever the legal process to fire MJ and aquire new management took place, would expose all the illegalities of MJ's financial portfolio and in so doing reveal these covert connections/operations, a motive much more logical than mere insurance money.

Finally, a 'murder' scenario can exist without Bannister and wine. Think about it.

Right, thanks Mourning Star. People like Mourning Star, who show an appreciation of the bigger picture, show an honest understanding of the true facts. Persons whose sole interest is quick denial expose themselves in their willingness to ignore this bigger picture. Just because people are trying to deny the wine doesn't mean the whole mafia, kidnapping, death threat aspect of Jeffery, or his relationship, and its meaning, goes away.

Mourning Star shows shrewd understanding of the real motives above. Jeffery said to Wright "I had to do it, I had no choice" ("Powerful people depend on me being your manager"). I've probably studied intel intrigue a little more than some on this site. A trick they use is called a "limited hang-out". What they do is offer a sacrificial lamb when people get close. Jeffery and his mundane business motive is the limited hang-out in this case. What reinforces this is the pattern of denials that followed in the media with Levine's statement and Meic Steven's red herring. There was no follow-through investigation of Wright's claim because they want people to believe Jeffery killed Hendrix for insurance and then forget about it. That way you'll never seek to find out about the intel Bahamian bank or COINTELPRO motives or the evidence for it. Deniers are like people foolishly playing the naked roles of the play "Hair" on a stage set-up for Shakespeare's Hamlet.Well, all things considered and equal in love & war, my position (posted earlier) is, so far, unaltered.

Carry on,
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

Scrum Drum
07-04-11, 02:39 PM
If you are shrewd you'll understand Goose's entry of the known facts points to other causes than the claimed insurance policy. If you pay attention to the established facts you'll see the insurance claim reason isn't backed-up by any substantiated material. So if Jeffery didn't murder Jimi for any insurance policy then why did he murder him? Deniers will account for this by claiming Jimi wasn't murdered. But if you follow this closely you'll see this only establishes Jimi was murdered for other reasons. Well, gee, I wonder if it had anything to do with those banks or Jeffery's books being scrutinized? Posters who deny that Jimi was making moves to fire Jeffery have gotten away with murder there and haven't been called on it. Wise people will see a glaring contrast between their alleged level of scrutiny and their leaving that plain lie untouched. Anyone with any honest knowledge of Jimi Hendrix would know he was witnessed and documented as trying to fire Jeffery since 1969. Murder deniers deny this and people let them get away with it (because they're not honestly seeking the facts here).


Goose exposes an important thing here. As I pointed out before, Levine recently said Jimi had a rosey relationship with Jeffery and happy future plans. Levine then said Jeffery's insurance policy with Jimi was innocent and had nothing sinister attached to it. Yet you see above that Levine himself was the one quoted through the years as saying he warned Jimi not to sign any personal policies with Jeffery because "He had bad feelings about it". No one has bothered to ask Levine what those bad feelings were or why he completely changed his story? And these are people who pose themselves as hyper-critical observers allowing that giant contradiction to go unopposed.

Smart people will see Levine exposed something he might not be aware of the significance of. He said that when he spoke to Jeffery on the 17th Jeffery said he would be unavailable the next day due to a boating outing. Jeffery was a sneaky intel operator. Levine probably doesn't realize he recorded Jeffery making an excuse for being unavailable when Jimi was murdered - just like he was unavailable when Jimi was busted in Toronto, and unavailable when Jimi was kidnapped.

I don't trust Trixie Sullivan. Of all the people who made alibis for Jeffery there's not one of them who tells exactly where he was on Majorca that night or what he was doing. If you pay close attention Electric Gypsy says Jeffery conducted his own investigation of Jimi's death. Shapiro says "Jeffery slipped secretly in and out of Majorca in order to conduct the investigation". Well, if Jeffery slipped in and out of Majorca secretly then maybe he did that night as well? In any case Jeffery needed not be there for the murder. He could just as easily have been covering-up the real story to Wright in order to protect the bigger players. The fact the forensics show no pills were shoved down Jimi's mouth sort of reinforces this. Murder doubters use these conflicts to dismiss the story all together but they don't pursue what other evidence it leads to. Jeffery was most-likely covering-up an intel hit with his confession as an MI-6 agent would. In this bigger pattern you can see the "mafia" forces that might lead Monika to stick with such a flimsy story for so long. Or why the British Government would avoid it so desperately...

purple jim
07-04-11, 02:44 PM
If Monika wiped Jimi's face of vomit because she was repulsed by the untidy-ness of Jimi's state, as she said, then why did she leave Jimi covered in grotesque amounts of vomit? Your supposition suggests Monika cleaned a small amount of vomit but then left a huge ugly amount of vomit untouched for hours in front of other people cleaning the flat.

Don't DENY logic. She might have wiped some vomit in the initial stages. We know that she started to freak out and phoned the place where Burdon was sleeping. Jimi vomits more profusely and she freaks out even more, freezes up in horror (at what she has done?). "Call the fucking ambulance" screams Burdon but it's hopeless, Danneman is hopeless. She can't even bring herself to help the lifeless Jimi. She even hides when the ambulance comes.


Bannister recalled the unusual amounts of wine he suctioned from Jimi Hendrix the morning of September 18th 1970. Simple as that. Deny it if you want.

I don't need to DENY it as Bannister is either making it up (to save his tattered reputation as STPLSD has underlined) or confusing his distant memory with another person (as he himself said, an "unusually tall man" which Jimi certainly wasn't.

I simply can't understand how anybody with any sense and intelligence would accept the drivel that Bannister or Tappy Wright have come out with.

goose334
07-04-11, 02:49 PM
Just to set the record straight, i think Mj had nothing to do with it and only had things to loose from the loss of his friend.
His 1973 mid-air collision over french military radar covered waters and jimi's muse, falling to her death from a 3rd story building, i think are not co-incidental.

I'd say his road managers were greater trouble then any other, sabotaging amplifiers and messing with his guitars tuning bridge.

"very sorry for tuning up, but we do that to protect your ears, thats why we don't play so loud.
And uh, cowboys don't want to stay in tune anyways, im so glad you have patience though, cuz' i don't."
-JH isle of wight - end of dolly dagger

Jimi fired jerry stickles and eric berrett early morning sept.4th. Oddly, jerry can be seen on camera the 6th at the isle of fehmarn escorting hendrix to the stage.
then he dedicated a special version of foxy lady to them, heh.

:correction Devon died February '71.

manfree
07-04-11, 03:22 PM
This appears to be turning into THAT thread!

Scrum Drum
07-04-11, 03:25 PM
The British magazine article where Slater admits calling the ambulance from the payphone across the street is from 'Classic Rock' magazine; Issue 135 - Aug 2009.

In it Slater says the last thing he and Monika did at the Samarkand was walk across the street to the private park the residents of Lansdowne Crescent all had a key to and bury some drugs in the garden before calling the ambulance.

Since this was done at 11:18am it shows the drug clean-up was not the first priority they took 5 hours to deal with. They were obviously cleaning-up murder evidence they were aware of - which explains yet another hint Monika gives that the road crew was only interested in cleaning-up phone-messages and office notes.

The stage crew members could never touch Jimi without Jeffery's permission. They knew better because of what would happen to them from the people who backed Jeffery. The same thing that happened to Jimi and frightened them into covering it up from the start.

MourningStar
07-04-11, 03:27 PM
^ Scrum arnt you worried that Jimi's killers will seek you out for eposing THE FACTS? ;)Could be SD's entire, admirably tenacious efforts, as well as, in like-wise, his opponents, in addition to the post-mortem revelations past & present, that have entered the mainstream media and are used as their support sources, ARE ALL a clever and clandestine operation to maneuver away from the truth and contain 'what really happened'.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/XiKano/EMOTSMILEY/emot-munch.gif

goose334
07-04-11, 03:33 PM
Sure they could, why would they need permission if it was done in secret? sure makes sense that they would get back all incriminating evidence.
After hedrix, sticklles got a roadie job with queen.
just a note, Jeffery actually went to and spoke at his funeral, neither Stickells or Barrett showed up.



The stage crew members could never touch Jimi without Jeffery's permission. They knew better because of what would happen to them from the people who backed Jeffery. The same thing that happened to Jimi and frightened them into covering it up from the start.

Scrum Drum
07-04-11, 03:53 PM
Don't DENY logic. She might have wiped some vomit in the initial stages. We know that she started to freak out and phoned the place where Burdon was sleeping. Jimi vomits more profusely and she freaks out even more, freezes up in horror (at what she has done?). "Call the fucking ambulance" screams Burdon but it's hopeless, Danneman is hopeless. She can't even bring herself to help the lifeless Jimi. She even hides when the ambulance comes.


This is all too easy. Monika has shown us she's hardly a person who freezes-up in horror. Many people, including Sharon Lawrence, commented that right after Jimi died Monika showed no signs of any emotion over it and acted like it was nothing. They said it was so weird it was creepy. This is not a person who freezes-up. It's a person who's coldly able to maintain dangerous dark secrets. If Monika was that feeble-minded she would have broke. She would have frozen-up under questioning. No, instead she shows quick-minded cunning and tells Ms Lawrence she washed 'sick' off Jimi's face with wine. Something that was obviously never done. Unless Monika was frozen for 7 hours she had no excuse for not cleaning-up Jimi as she alleged. Jimi was never cleaned-up. Monika was lying about the wine because she knew she had to make an excuse for it. Your "logic" is just willful deceit and denial of the obvious.

Where you trap yourself is your ignoring that the first road crew to arrive never would have left Jimi untouched. They would have rushed over and wiped the vomit off Jimi and tried to clear his throat and revive him. It's very obvious that the reason they didn't do this is because Monika told them there was no reason to. Most-likely she told them Jimi had been murdered. This perfectly explains why no one ever touched the body or tried to help Jimi. Your scenario suggests all those who arrived froze-up like ninnies and were afraid to touch Jimi or help him. Its ridiculousness should be obvious.




I don't need to DENY it as Bannister is either making it up (to save his tattered reputation as STPLSD has underlined) or confusing his distant memory with another person (as he himself said, an "unusually tall man" which Jimi certainly wasn't.

I simply can't understand how anybody with any sense and intelligence would accept the drivel that Bannister or Tappy Wright have come out with.


Good. You're only answering your own arguments. You have no truthful answer for the real arguments like the scarf. My arguments have forced you into that. You can't honestly account for why both Monika and Bannister speak of wine.

The reason people believe Bannister and Wright is because all the truthful evidence points towards it. People can see others trying to hide behind their deflective canards and denials.

Scrum Drum
07-04-11, 04:07 PM
Sure they could, why would they need permission if it was done in secret? sure makes sense that they would get back all incriminating evidence.
After hedrix, sticklles got a roadie job with queen.
just a note, Jeffery actually went to and spoke at his funeral, neither Stickells or Barrett showed up.


Sure, Jeffery would never figure this out. No, you're not processing the intelligent facts. Jimi was the vested concern of some very heavy players like Warner Brothers and the mafia who were documented as coercing him with gunfire and other tactics like killing Bobby Woods to send a message and make sure Woods didn't breach the real relationship Jeffery had to him to his new bar room friend. If you are suggesting the road crew members could kill Jimi "secretly" without Jeffery, or those who backed him, figuring it out you're fooling yourself. You can't kill a subject of mafia concern without their permission. And you can't do it "secretly" without serious repercussions.

The music industry was so mafia-infiltrated that it would be no problem getting the road crew members jobs. Jeffery's suspicious behaviour after Jimi's death is more than documented. But you are contradicting your own self. If you think Jeffery died suspiciously then it wasn't because of his road crew members.

stplsd
07-04-11, 04:42 PM
Conspiracy waterboarders “protest too much” and at huge length. “They are sophist/semantic spider web spinners who want us to make the mistake of entertaining their dishonest arguments in order to mire the evidence in the quagmire they keep trying to drag it down into.”

It's plain dishonest to try to conflate
“It's plain dishonest” to attempt to wriggle away from the fact that Bannister’s testimony in a court of law would be rendered worthless by his sitiuation. ie Awaiting judgement for several counts of malpractice, and finding out he was being accused of another in Electric Gypsy, at the time when he made up his story and his being struck off the medical register due to his FRAUD (ie lying for personal gain). There is no “conflation.”

Bannister's legal problems with his witnessing of the wine.
His "problems” (as you euphemistically call them, blatantly leaving out their nature) had nothing to do with his wine story, which was told in a private letter to Shapiro during the tribunal’s deliberations. He was tried by a medical tribunal on several charges of malpractice of which he was found guilty of 2 and the FRAUD for which he was struck of the medical register. This has obvious, direct and profound bearing on the reliability of his claims, as any court of law would agree.
Clearly showing that Bannister was found guily of FRAUD (ie lieing for gain) and the reason why he made up this red wine "alibi", and how his story changed to make it even more obvious when they were eventually made public (prior to his first bid to be reinstated) would be used as strong evidence in any trial, that the "witness" was extremely unreliable, especially given that no one else mentions wine of any kind. A bent ex-doctor's excuse is not a "fact", it's an excuse.

The large scarf seen around Jimi's neck in Monika's photos was... . . . not of a “towel or jumper” like material. “Those who are desperate to avoid this obvious evidence,” will say it was definitely a scarf, leaving out what he actually said and the context he used it in, which is the whole point, ie “Bannister invented it in order to” degrade Hendix’ image in comparison to his shining portrayal of his own character. No one else concerned says that he was other than fully clothed.

So if we get back to reality and . . ... . “ignore [the "waterboarder's"] deliberate [non] intellectual obstruction.” “It is plain to see” they have not meaningfully engaged with the obvious unreliability of Bannister’s story. “And all [... their] “rhetorical bluster”, “won't make” Bannister's proven dishonesty and total lack of support from anyone else involved go away.
Some people may think. . .
. . . Bannister didn't have to invent any wine to save his reputation since Siefert and the attendants already said Jimi was dead.
But “smart people will realize” Seifert’s interview wasn’t published until the late 1992 (after the September edition of Straight Ahead) revision of Electric Gypsy and Bannister’s letter was written on 9 January. Seifert isn’t even mentioned in the edition he refers to. “The attendants” are the ambulance men who’s interviews were not included in either edition of EG and were first published in Straight Ahead September 1992.

"Smart people" will also realize it clearly wasn't to "save his reputation" as his reputation was already called into question by the several cases of malpractice and fraud he was facing at the time, two of which he would soon be found guilty of and more importantly the FRAUD, which destroyed any good reputation he may have had. It appears a damage limitation exercise and an attempt to create an alibi against this further allegation, which he appears to have thought might adversly affect the outcome of his trial and, more clearly, damage his planned appeal bid. He needn't have bothered because the tribunal didn't refer to it (how many senior medical doctors in Australia would be reading EG anyway? - not a lot) anyway, making the judgement on the cases brought before them earlier as did the later appeal tribunal which denied his appeal on the seriousness of the case and his obviously unreformed character.

purple jim
07-04-11, 04:57 PM
Since this was done at 11:18am it shows the drug clean-up was not the first priority they took 5 hours to deal with. They were obviously cleaning-up murder evidence they were aware of - which explains yet another hint Monika gives that the road crew was only interested in cleaning-up phone-messages and office notes.

Oh yeah, all these friends of Jimi were aware that Jimi was murdered and covered the whole thing up through fear for decades. Pure fantasy. Don't ask us to explain what took so long. We weren't there.



Where you trap yourself is..

I'm free as bird mate.


This is all too easy. Monika has shown us she's hardly a person who freezes-up in horror. Many people, including Sharon Lawrence, commented that right after Jimi died Monika showed no signs of any emotion over it and acted like it was nothing.

So Burdons comments about her phoning him in a dithering panic is just lies then.




Where you trap yourself is your ignoring that the first road crew to arrive never would have left Jimi untouched. They would have rushed over and wiped the vomit off Jimi and tried to clear his throat and revive him.

Maybe somebody tried but realised that it was hopeless. Who knows, we were'nt there. Were you?

stplsd
07-04-11, 06:10 PM
I trust a trained medical doctor

You mean you trust the "story" of a person found guilty of two cases of malpractice and struck of the medical register for FRAUD (ie lying for personal gain) in his panic stricken and underhand attempt at an alibi against a futher accusation of malpractice. Against all the other witnesses, to base your entire case on.


I think some people are so driven by denial of the obvious that they actually delude themselves into believing. . . . . . the FRAUDSTER Bannister "simple as that."

Scrum Drum
07-04-11, 06:45 PM
Oh yeah, all these friends of Jimi were aware that Jimi was murdered and covered the whole thing up through fear for decades. Pure fantasy.


You act as if this case wasn't full of vague and unanswered contradicting stories. You're a little generous seeing how these people are still alive and could be asked - but aren't. Ever wonder why they're not being asked? Or are you just satisfied with the flighty-est of denials? You act as if there weren't serious questions that need to be answered here.

Burdon's an interesting fellow. He seems to have gone out of his way to say Jimi committed suicide. Was he trying to cover for Jeffery?



Don't ask us to explain what took so long. We weren't there.


You're not asking the right questions. Since we can assume those persons didn't clean the flat and search for messages while Jimi lay dying we can reasonably assume Jimi was dead while they cleaned. These people were not cleaning specks of marijuana that might be in the rugs, they were cleaning murder evidence.

The "free as a bird" people don't bother themselves with detecting that Monika told the Inquest the Samarkand was a secret place known only to her and Jimi where Jimi could hide-out in London from his management and the press. These free as a bird people don't bother to notice that Monika herself said the road crew members collected up notes and phone messages from Jeffery's office in the flat. That's the trouble with this case is that these kind of obvious contradictions are usually jumped upon by investigators as a sign of lying and trying to hide something. Yet this didn't happen in this case. Why? How can the flat be a secret hide-away from Jeffery's office and contain phone messages from that office at the same time? And why hasn't anybody bothered to ask this basic question?

Shrewd people will notice that Monika, Stickells, and Slater made overt efforts to distance themselves from knowledge of the Samarkand. Monika did so by saying only her and Jimi knew about the secret flat but then clumsily gave away hints that others knew about it too. Stickells said he went to the Cumberland when summoned, showing that he didn't know about the Samarkand. But Jimi's dire condition makes it unlikely Slater would have neglected telling him where Jimi's murdered body lay. Slater told Earth magazine in December 1970 that they were at the flat that evening but couldn't envisage what would happen later on. They're hiding something.



So Burdons comments about her phoning him in a dithering panic is just lies then.


Panic being a perfectly reasonable reaction to murder. Where it gets qualified is in the arguments you are refusing to answer.




Maybe somebody tried but realised that it was hopeless. Who knows, we were'nt there. Were you?


Funny that didn't show-up in the testimony. Instead there's just a suspicious void of vague accounts. Nobody tried to help him because they knew he was murdered. The people called to the scene worked in Jeffery's office. They would have been the first people to have direct knowledge of Jimi's problems with Jeffery. When they arrived they knew exactly what happened. The rest of the story fits this perfectly and explains why they took so long to remove evidence and call an ambulance. Did it ever tickle your suspicion that this particular instance was never directly explained? When Burdon was asked he dodged by saying "I just couldn't bring myself to go in and look at that mess" (Sure, Burdon rushed to the scene but then never checked on Jimi - sure). Doubters don't seem to have any problem with this despite their endless scrutiny of other details.

stplsd
07-04-11, 09:46 PM
The British magazine article where Slater admits calling the ambulance from the payphone across the street is from 'Classic Rock' magazine; Issue 135 - Aug 2009.

We would need to see a scan as you are not to be trusted, having wrongly quoted, added stuff that wasn't in the original, left out bits, indicated that it was a direct interview when it was a hearsay report of what someone allegedly said etc. Slater wouldn't be "admitting" anyway, he hasn't been accused. He may be claiming something, that's not the same, he is under no compulsion to say anything. He's free to claim or make up anything he likes

MourningStar
07-04-11, 09:51 PM
We would need to see a scan as you are not to be trusted, having wrongly quoted, added stuff that wasn't in the original, left out bits, indicated that it was a direct interview when it was a hearsay report of what someone allegedly said etc.What 'we'? YOU got what you were whining for. Find it and scan it yourself and leave the 'we' out of it.

stplsd
07-04-11, 09:56 PM
What 'we'? YOU got what you were whining for. Find it and scan it yourself and leave the 'we' out of it.

No need to throw your toys out your pram, you obviously aren't included in the "we". Anyone that takes his word as to the actual contents hasn't been keeping up, as he has constantly shown himself to be very "innacurate" in that departement. If he want's his claim to be believed by all he would need to provide scans.

Ezy Rider
07-04-11, 10:53 PM
Bannister witnessed the wine.

yes, in his recollection (many years later) of somebody else's body, not Jimi's. Nobody here denies Bannister witnessed any wine. It just wasn't Jimi, that's all.

And to recapitulate the arguments (because that is what we are doing here, not "believing" stories):

1) Bannister remembers an unusually tall person with his feet extending over the bed. Jimi was not that tall.

2) Bannister remembers this person naked with a towel of sorts around his neck. Jimi was dressed and no towel of sorts (a white shawl, if indeed worn, should be easily recognised as such and is not a towel of sorts). Actually, during waterboarding a soaked towel is indeed normally used and put over the victim's face after which it is drenched with water (why wine? isn't that too inconvenient?).

3) Bannister remembers this person drenched in wine, with wine in his hair and on the towel. No such statements were found in the autopsy report or from the various witness accounts of those arriving at the scene.

4) Bannister remembers "uncorking" the dried vomit from this person's trachea after which a flood of wine came out of his lungs. Again, no such thing can be substantiated by the autopsy report (it nowhere said wine in the lungs or in the stomach), other than the possibly dried up vomit according to MD. (I am no specialist in medical forensics but both drowning with wine in one lungs and being suffocated by vomit at the same time seems a bit implausible. And let's not forget the almost lethal dose of vesparex. Triple murder at once?) Also, Tappy nowhere says (thanks STPLSD!) that they waterboarded Jimi, just stuffed him with pills and wine. Tappy probably wanted to suggest that they wanted to make it look like an accident: a drunken Hendrix taking too many sleeping pills.

ergo, Jimi was not waterboarded with wine and Bannister remembered the event incorrectly.

goose334
07-05-11, 12:09 AM
Eh, you can belive whatever you want, you seem deeply emotionally invested in your idea's, and i wont waste my time arguring other wise, i've said my piece, and could care less about your bloviating about how i have no intelligent rational to my ideas when i've only pointed out facts.


This is all too easy. Monika has shown us she's hardly a person who freezes-up in horror. Many people, including Sharon Lawrence, commented that right after Jimi died Monika showed no signs of any emotion over it and acted like it was nothing. They said it was so weird it was creepy. This is not a person who freezes-up. It's a person who's coldly able to maintain dangerous dark secrets. If Monika was that feeble-minded she would have broke. She would have frozen-up under questioning. No, instead she shows quick-minded cunning and tells Ms Lawrence she washed 'sick' off Jimi's face with wine. Something that was obviously never done. Unless Monika was frozen for 7 hours she had no excuse for not cleaning-up Jimi as she alleged. Jimi was never cleaned-up. Monika was lying about the wine because she knew she had to make an excuse for it. Your "logic" is just willful deceit and denial of the obvious.

Where you trap yourself is your ignoring that the first road crew to arrive never would have left Jimi untouched. They would have rushed over and wiped the vomit off Jimi and tried to clear his throat and revive him. It's very obvious that the reason they didn't do this is because Monika told them there was no reason to. Most-likely she told them Jimi had been murdered. This perfectly explains why no one ever touched the body or tried to help Jimi. Your scenario suggests all those who arrived froze-up like ninnies and were afraid to touch Jimi or help him. Its ridiculousness should be obvious.

Good. You're only answering your own arguments. You have no truthful answer for the real arguments like the scarf. My arguments have forced you into that. You can't honestly account for why both Monika and Bannister speak of wine.

The reason people believe Bannister and Wright is because all the truthful evidence points towards it. People can see others trying to hide behind their deflective canards and denials.

Scrum Drum
07-05-11, 12:28 AM
Eh, you can belive whatever you want, you seem deeply emotionally invested in your idea's, and i wont waste my time arguring other wise, i've said my piece, and could care less about your bloviating about how i have no intelligent rational to my ideas when i've only pointed out facts.


Ah, I think you're answering a post that was addressed to Purple Jim. I did however explain why it isn't likely the road crew members could murder Jimi "secretly" as you suggested.

Scrum Drum
07-05-11, 01:24 AM
yes, in his recollection (many years later) of somebody else's body, not Jimi's. Nobody here denies Bannister witnessed any wine. It just wasn't Jimi, that's all.


That's rubbish and you know it. Your mystery man that Bannister allegedly mistook for Jimi doesn't exist. If we could somehow find a list of patients Bannister treated you would not be able to find any tall black man with a wine soaked "towel" around his neck and hair saturated in wine who died from being drowned in wine while overdosed on the same barbiturates Monika had in her flat. The trouble with your theory is you would have to produce such a man. I guarantee if we could speak to Bannister and tell him of your denier theory he would quickly straighten out this nonsense. Bannister locked-in the memory of his treating Hendrix because shortly after he was told he had treated a world famous rock figure. While you people demand strict evidence your own airy theories are based on imaginary people. We have much cross-witnessing to the wine. All you have is multiple doubters wishing your imaginary tall man to be true. Yet your side speaks with authority on this imaginary person you know doesn't exist.



3) Bannister remembers this person drenched in wine, with wine in his hair and on the towel. No such statements were found in the autopsy report or from the various witness accounts of those arriving at the scene.


I've explained this numerous times but you people keep returning to the same self-serving arguments. Bannister was the main witness to the wine because he removed the hardened plug of vomit that the attendants spoke of. The attendants said they had trouble establishing an airway because there was a hard plug of vomit in the windpipe. So, while you say Bannister recalled another person you fail to notice that both Bannister and the attendants both mentioned this hardened plug of vomit in the windpipe. This is an evidentiary bullseye from which your denier position will never recover. Bannister also mentioned removing this plug after which "masses of red wine issued out". Because Siefert had quit off Jimi Bannister was the only medical witness to this wine which he then proceeded to remove. At the time he thought Jimi was an unfortunate alcohol and drug abuse victim.

For you to suggest the wine would be mentioned at the autopsy only reveals your lack of credible understanding of the forensics. Since Bannister had suctioned out all but the small amounts of "fluid" found in a lung at the autopsy it would be impossible for the autopsy to record wine that was already removed. Your suggestion that they would only furthers your lack of understanding of the basic arguments involved here.

The attendants were too far ahead of the issue to notice the wine. They simply recorded it as "vomit". The forensically-relevant wine was still inside Jimi's body at this point. However they did note one important forensic clue. They noted a noticeable post-mortem gurgling in Jimi. That is because Jimi's lungs and stomach were full of wine. Jimi's post-death evacuations in the ambulance, that were also noted by the attendants, were because his digestive system was loaded with wine. People doing credible analysis will notice these clues. Cheap excuse makers won't. They also will ignore this critical evidentiary argument and return to the same old 'tall man' canards. By doing this they show they can't answer the arguments, and in doing so show those arguments' worth.




4) Bannister remembers "uncorking" the dried vomit from this person's trachea after which a flood of wine came out of his lungs. Again, no such thing can be substantiated by the autopsy report (it nowhere said wine in the lungs or in the stomach), other than the possibly dried up vomit according to MD. (I am no specialist in medical forensics but both drowning with wine in one lungs and being suffocated by vomit at the same time seems a bit implausible. And let's not forget the almost lethal dose of vesparex. Triple murder at once?) Also, Tappy nowhere says (thanks STPLSD!) that they waterboarded Jimi, just stuffed him with pills and wine. Tappy probably wanted to suggest that they wanted to make it look like an accident: a drunken Hendrix taking too many sleeping pills.


I suggest your suggestion that the autopsy that was performed 3 days later would find either a plug of vomit that was removed and disposed of, as well as wine that was drained away and disposed of, to be an indication that you are unable to grasp even the most basic elements of this forensic argument. Neither a plug of vomit or wine that was removed 3 days earlier and disposed of would be available to be detected at the autopsy. This is why Bannister is such an important witness, because he was the one to witness the wine because of its particular forensic configuration.

I'm the one who pointed-out that the forensics don't support any pills being shoved down Jimi's throat simply because the blood barbiturate level showed that at least a half hour transpired before death. Just because Jimi got the pills in him some other way doesn't mean the wine forensics are canceled. Jimi was drowned in wine while passed-out on a knock-out dose of Vesparax.




ergo, Jimi was not waterboarded with wine and Bannister remembered the event incorrectly.


There's a simple thing here that needs to be recognized. Monika would not have confessed administering wine onto Jimi unless that wine existed. You pretend that the exact status of the 4 wine bottles we've traced to the Samarkand that evening has been established. The reason we don't hear any testimony about the status of the wine bottles from any of the witnesses is because they were all empty because they were used to drown Jimi Hendrix, as Bannister witnessed, and Monika painfully lied around. I'm also impressed by the forthcomingness of the road crew members to come forward and correct the record.

purple jim
07-05-11, 01:59 AM
These people were not cleaning specks of marijuana that might be in the rugs, they were cleaning murder evidence.

What "murder evidence" was there to clean up? Pills and bottles of wine? If this was a supposed to be a scrupulously planned murder in a Jeffrey organised hideout, why would it neccessitate a 5 hour clean-up after the event? Would our MI5 genius fill this den full of clues which needed to be painstaikingly taken apart after the planned murderer? It's laughable like the conspiracy theory itself.
"Smart people", "shrewd people",... hilarious..

stplsd
07-05-11, 06:11 AM
4) Bannister remembers "uncorking" the dried vomit from this person's trachea after which a flood of wine came out of his lungs. .

No. He doesn't "remember 'uncorking'" anything. This is what Bannister actually said: "Prior to suction, there was wine and gastric contents exuding from his mouth," ie in a liquid state and mixed, then later in his 1993 Times interview, when told that no one else including the pathologist mentioned wine, "He expressed surprise"... [replying]: "It was coming out of his nose and out of his mouth," ie in both statements there is no "plug", and he's claiming that the wine was there for all to see.

This "plug" scenario is a medical science and Bannister defying invention by SD to attempt to wriggle out of why no-one else saw any wine (obviously not noticing the above statements). SD claims that a hitherto unobserved medical miracle took place. That as Jimi was "waterboarded", so he claims, he vomited, inhaling some (he would have been inhaling wine from the start as well don't forget) then the rest of his lungs filled with wine, almost to the point of death (claiming that Jimi didn't swallow up to that point, so wine didn't go into his stomach), then, nearly dead (he would have been stone dead already with the vomit down to "the smaller bronchi" and the claimed very large amount of wine in his lungs), managed to vomit again (copiously this time) which "corked" in the large amount of wine, then "masses" more wine just by passed the large amount of vomit and went into his stomach but didn't mix with the other contents. A vomit/wine/vomit "plug"/wine/other stomach contents, a miracle sandwich. Then Bannister's "medical staff" ie the nurses (so far unidentified and likely to remain so.), after the other two doctors had left, (Bannister said Jimi was obviously long dead, DOA) spent half an hour, in an apparenty busy casualty ward, managing to suck out all the wine, miraculously leaving behind the contents of a "medium sized meal" and vomited material in the lungs down to the smaller bronchi - nearly half a litre in one - for Teare to discover .
This is how SD explains that red wine wasn't found in his lungs and stomach contents at the autopsy. He can't rationally explain how the wine in his lungs didn't mix significantly with the vomit and that in the stomach didn't mix with the remains of a medium sized meal there. He can't rationally explain the biological miracle that created his allegedly clearly demarcated 5 tier vomit and wine sandwich. (One could almost think from SD's scenario that Bannister was part of the conspiracy - waiting till the other main witnesses had left, then removing the evidence;))
Nevermind that Bannister said that, prior to suction, it was in a liquid state anyway, flowing out of his nose and mouth for all to see.
'Death by red wine' requires this bogus scenario and it's series of medical miracles to explain away why no one else saw any wine. Don't forget Jimi was manipulated onto a stretcher, up an awkward staircase, driven at high speed round corners and over bumps, manhandled into the casualty, with all the sloshing around of his stomach contents that would neccessarily entail, and the ambulance crew, who claimed he was dead (for an article in Straight Ahead), yet claiming to have worked on him till they got to the hospital. SD's idea for his "plug" fantasy came because the crew said they couldn't get the aspirator through the vomit which they say "went all the way down," "there was a hell of a lot of it" "couldn't shift that lot" claiming it was dry, but then again that he was lying in a "pool" of vomit ie it was still liquid. Bannister on the other hand only says it was in a liquid state and wine was clearly visible (with other gastric contents) flowing out his nose and mouth.

Ezy Rider
07-05-11, 08:03 AM
^
Ha, I am glad you "cleared" that out of the way too:-)

[see how easy it is to be taken in by nonsense stories, as long as one keeps repeating them, they become a "fact", huh)

stplsd
07-05-11, 08:08 AM
Ha, I am glad you "cleared" that out of the way too:-)

You got it - now:)


[see how easy it is to be taken in by nonsense stories,

Not to mention his oceans of verbosity, his numerous red herrings, like the towel. etc. etc. to smoke screen the obvious nonsense of the foundation of his argument, namely, the apparently shamless, Bannister's "stories"


as long as one keeps repeating them, they become a "fact", huh)

I haven't noticed him repeating this one, funnily enough. Maybe it doesn't bear repeating, eh, SD;)

scoutship
07-05-11, 09:48 AM
Not to mention the unexplained, so far, apparently huge discrepancy in the "autopsy transcript" between the blood alcohol at 5mg% (looks like a zero might be missing? or the blood was not in sufficient condition to get a reasonably accurate level, his words "failed to reveal more than" hint at this. DD A/B level is 80mg%), the urine alcohol at 46mg (the % is oddly not there, which begs the question 100mg in proportion to what? - DD U/A level is 107mg% by-the-way SD;) ) and Teare's reported 100mg ( we are, again, left to presume %) estimate for the blood alcohol at the time of taking the tablets. It does appear that he used the very much higher urine level to calculate his estimate.


Well I'm not up to speed on all of this (haven't been able to log in for many months) line (and not certain I want to slog into it again) but are you meaning the 46mg alcohol per 100 ml of urine count? From which Teare estimated his 100mg / 100 ml (of blood? can't offhand recall) at the time of ingesting the Vesperax?

scoutship
07-05-11, 10:03 AM
The British magazine article where Slater admits calling the ambulance from the payphone across the street is from 'Classic Rock' magazine; Issue 135 - Aug 2009.


You know I have that ish.

"When Eric Burdon asked Monika why she hadn't called an ambulance, she said that she was scared because there were drugs in the room. So first on the scene was Eric's roadie Terry Slater who told Kathy that he and Monika cleared out the flat, going across the road to some adjacent gardens where they buried the drugs. Meanwhile the ambulance drivers arrived to find Jimi dead and alone in the room....Terry said that he and Monica [sic] viewed all this from across the street."

Where does TS "admit" to calling the ambulance "from the payphone across the street"?

Hadn't someone put up a scan of Shapiro's (the author) complete article at some point here?

It is a curious oversight, perhaps by the magazine's editors (see eg the variant spellings of "Monika" and "Monica"), that Shapiro notes going to check hospital admission records for 18th August 1970, not September, in the course of the piece.

scoutship
07-05-11, 10:15 AM
just a note, Jeffery actually went to and spoke at his funeral, neither Stickells or Barrett showed up.

First I can recall hearing this bit. You know there's a recounting of the speakers, a partial guest list, a number of photos, a ref to Stickells having helped get the body back to the U.S., & so on, yes?

From Electric Gypsy:

"...but by 1 October, the day of Jimi's funeral, it was a weak winter sun that shone. In the morning, parties of Jimi's friends and acquaintances flew in from New York, Los Angeles, and London: John Hammond, Johnny Winter, Steve Paul from the Scene club, Miles Davis, Noel and Mitch, Buddy Miles, Alan Douglas, Devon, Eric Barrett and Gerry Stickells, Chuck Wein, Eddie Kramer."

dino77
07-05-11, 10:55 AM
You know I have that ish.

"When Eric Burdon asked Monika why she hadn't called an ambulance, she said that she was scared because there were drugs in the room. So first on the scene was Eric's roadie Terry Slater who told Kathy that he and Monika cleared out the flat, going across the road to some adjacent gardens where they buried the drugs. Meanwhile the ambulance drivers arrived to find Jimi dead and alone in the room....Terry said that he and Monica [sic] viewed all this from across the street."


M-fucking creeps... :mad:

Scrum Drum
07-05-11, 01:06 PM
"When Eric Burdon asked Monika why she hadn't called an ambulance, she said that she was scared because there were drugs in the room.


All of a sudden we are taking Monika at her word. Meanwhile if examine Monika's own words in Inner World she says she didn't do drugs. So, if Jimi was hardly ever at the Samarkand, as people say, where did the drugs come from? Monika is fairly cunning. You would think that a person who was able to make-up such confident lies over the years would have been able to figure-out how to flush a handful of drugs down the toilet - wouldn't you think? Perhaps Monika had another more pressing reason to be scared?




So first on the scene was Eric's roadie Terry Slater who told Kathy that he and Monika cleared out the flat, going across the road to some adjacent gardens where they buried the drugs.


Notice Slater never locks himself in to any times here? Who called Slater, and at what time? And when did Slater arrive? How many drugs? And why did it take them so long to clear them out? (They're lying)




Meanwhile the ambulance drivers arrived to find Jimi dead and alone in the room....Terry said that he and Monica [sic] viewed all this from across the street."


Basic deduction tells you that any "meanwhile" involved in this tale means that the ambulance had already been called. If we use basic logic we'll find that records show the ambulance had been called from the payphone across the street at 11:18am. So any story Slater is telling about going across the street to bury drugs in the private garden, while "meanwhile" the ambulance arrived, means the call was made during this trip.

There's some important evidentiary clues here that need to be interpreted. First off we know the true times here involve Monika first calling at around 5:45am. So it therefore took from 5:45am to around 11:18am to finally get rid of the drugs. That's nearly six hours. Seems to me if Monika was that worried about any nominal stash Jimi had at the flat she could have flushed it in about 2 minutes. It's amazing how the excuse-makers don't apply any common sense. What Slater's story is indirectly telling us is that they waited nearly six hours to accomplish the task that they used as the excuse for not calling the ambulance. If you view this thread there's not one doubter who dares answer what exactly Jimi was doing during this whole time. Henderson was wise enough to point-out that if Jimi was alive this whole time those who were present must have known that such a delay would be fatal to Jimi's health. Obviously Jimi was dead as even Shapiro now admits. But let's get back to the drugs. Since the obvious timing of the drug burial inadvertently captured in Slater's account shows it came right as the ambulance arrived that means they waited until the very end to deal with the stated cause of the delay. Surely sensible people would question, if the drugs were the real reason for delaying the call for the ambulance, then why did they take five hours to get rid of them? Why didn't they get rid of them sooner?




Where does TS "admit" to calling the ambulance "from the payphone across the street"?


Slater, as usual, is vague about the exact timing of all this. There's a reason for that. He doesn't want to trap himself in incriminating specifics of exact times.

When he speaks of going across the street to the private park and says "meanwhile" the ambulance arrived he inadvertently traps himself in an established time schedule. Henderson writes on page 9 of ' 'Scuse Me' that Etchingham's investigation discovered that the phone call for the ambulance originated from the payphone across the street from the Samarkand. So this, and the fact Slater admits he and Monika watched the ambulance arrive from across the street, establishes in firm evidence that the call came from the payphone across the street as all evidence shows - including Slater's admission.

Doubters are a little lax and generous with their analyses. They tend to present the evidence in a doubting kind of 'gotcha' way without bothering to involve the greater arguments we've established from the broader body of evidence. People honestly interested in finding out what happened wouldn't stop short after seeing this. They would look further and try to tie-in what we know to this information. Once we establish Monika's story was a lie, as we have here, we can then legally say the British official cause of death verdict is invalid, as it was based on Monika's story. We can press the British Government on the fact that it never processed a valid and true version of the forensics based on the true timeline of Jimi's death. Trust me, had the tables been turned the British Government would have acted on this evidence long ago according to its own terms of evidence.




It is a curious oversight, perhaps by the magazine's editors (see eg the variant spellings of "Monika" and "Monica"), that Shapiro notes going to check hospital admission records for 18th August 1970, not September, in the course of the piece.


Well, according to the accepted standard here, we can then throw out everything Shapiro prints. We can also reject everything ever said about Hendrix from his partner Caesar Glebbeek.

What kills me the most about this is the simple fact Slater and all the others could be subpoena-ed and cross-examined on all this stuff. There's some very obvious questions that aren't being answered here. The fact no authority is asking them should tell you all you need to know. In any case, Scotland Yard's claim that "there was no new evidence" is certainly proven to be a criminal inaccuracy at this point for which they have yet been held to account. That's the friggin giant elephant in the room here and the reason this is being argued on internet sites instead of the legal venues where it belongs.

scoutship
07-05-11, 01:40 PM
^ What you said was:


The British magazine article where Slater admits calling the ambulance from the payphone across the street is from 'Classic Rock' magazine; Issue 135 - Aug 2009.

What you did above, of course, was something entirely different.

Scrum Drum
07-05-11, 02:01 PM
What "murder evidence" was there to clean up? Pills and bottles of wine? If this was a supposed to be a scrupulously planned murder in a Jeffrey organised hideout, why would it neccessitate a 5 hour clean-up after the event? Would our MI5 genius fill this den full of clues which needed to be painstaikingly taken apart after the planned murderer? It's laughable like the conspiracy theory itself.
"Smart people", "shrewd people",... hilarious..



Your answers tend to focus on one line while diverting from the greater arguments. What you fail to realize is the sword is very sharp and cuts both ways. If you think the behaviour of those involved doesn't reflect a well-planned intel hit then you still have to explain why, if Jimi's death was a common drug overdose, did they take 5 hours to clean the flat? The sword cuts both ways and you still have to answer why they would take 5 hours to clean the flat, and leave Jimi laying there dead, if the reason was a simple drug overdose? While you think 5 hours discounts a well-planned intel hit, I think 5 hours discounts a simple drug overdose. Especially when we involve the rest of the qualifying arguments you seem to grant yourself the privilege of ignoring. Monika said Stickells and Slater were only interested in collecting phone messages.

There's a basic clue that needs to be directly answered here. If Monika told researchers Jimi instructed her to rent the Samarkand as a secret place for him to hide-out from his management then why would there be any phone messages there? A more detailed description of this event would show that Stickells and Barrett were especially interested in any notes and phone messages from Jeffery's office. If the Samarkand was a secret hide-out then why would there be any messages from Jeffery's office there? And don't forget the other clues you are ignoring where these office members made incriminating statements to show they knew more about the Samarkand than they admitted.

Don't name-call - answer the points.

scoutship
07-05-11, 02:44 PM
A quick refresher in Logical Fallacies (http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/toc.htm)

(might be useful here)

Scrum Drum
07-05-11, 02:51 PM
What the doubters are trying to get away with ignoring, once again, is that the cross-references prove the wine. When you make the arguments for the wine they ignore them. The reason for that is because they are so obvious that they can't acknowledge them and support their deceitful doubt at the same time.


The reason the "Tall Man" canard is invalid is because the ambulance attendants witnessed something separate and unprompted that corroborates Bannister's witnessing. The ambulance attendants both said separately, and without any knowledge of Bannister's witnessing, that they encountered a hardened plug of vomit in Jimi's windpipe that their equipment wasn't capable of penetrating. They said because of this they were unable to establish an airway and thought they should get Jimi to hospital where the equipment that could deal with this was available. Bannister also separately witnessed this plug of vomit. STP is trying to lie around it using his usual dishonest word-trickery, however any intelligent person would see that the reason the attendants didn't witness the wine is because they admitted they couldn't penetrate the hardened plug of vomit with their equipment. They failed to breach the plug that was holding the wine in.

Now this testimony is important because those who are trying to deny the obvious and say Bannister pulled wine out of another person have to explain why separate people identified a precisely similar forensic feature in Jimi Hendrix as Bannister witnessed? The fact both Bannister and the attendants separately and independently identified a key forensic feature Jimi possessed that morning proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the patient Bannister treated was indeed Jimi Hendrix. Those who are trying to deny the man whom Bannister recalled suctioning wine out of was actually Jimi need to explain why key witnesses separately identified this key forensic feature?

Those who are honestly pursuing this would realize that since the attendants admitted they couldn't breach the blockage with their equipment (confirming the hardness of the plug) that therefore Bannister's statement that he "unplugged a cork of vomit from Jimi's windpipe, upon which masses of red wine then issued out" proves that Bannister treated Hendrix and completed the pathological process the attendants outlined. There is simply no reasonable person who would see this evidence, including the large scarf seen around Jimi's neck in Monika's photos, and conclude that the man Bannister witnessed was anyone other than the person he treated that morning - that is, Jimi Hendrix. But the fact our resident prevaricator shamelessly ignored this key evidence and tried to lie around it should tell most honest people enough.

People who are paying closer honest attention would realize that the attendants also witnessed something they didn't realize the value of at the time. They independently noted that Jimi was making gurgling sounds while they moved him. The reason he was doing this so noticeably is because his body was full of the wine Bannister witnessed shortly after. They also independently noted that Jimi had extensive bowel evacuation in the ambulance. That is because the wine flooding his digestive track helped force this out. These are subtle forensic clues that the wine Bannister witnessed was showing itself in ways that could be interpreted by those paying close attention to the evidence.

If you really want to know the truth look at how shamelessly the doubters dodged this.

Scrum Drum
07-05-11, 02:55 PM
A quick refresher in Logical Fallacies (http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/toc.htm)

(might be useful here)


Thank you for showing us you can't answer the direct arguments. (You'll have much company here).


I don't have a link for common techniques in truthful point evasion.


There's a simple formula here. People who are genuinely interested in pursuing this case can directly answer the points. Those driven away from points they obviously can't answer will provide links for irrelevant material that move away from the points they obviously can't answer.


Just use a basic rule and look at which direction people move in relation to the direct points.

stplsd
07-05-11, 03:19 PM
You know I have that ish.

"When Eric Burdon asked Monika why she hadn't called an ambulance, she said that she was scared because there were drugs in the room. So first on the scene was Eric's roadie Terry Slater who told Kathy that he and Monika cleared out the flat, going across the road to some adjacent gardens where they buried the drugs. Meanwhile the ambulance drivers arrived to find Jimi dead and alone in the room....Terry said that he and Monica [sic] viewed all this from across the street."

Where does TS "admit" to calling the ambulance "from the payphone across the street"?

Just typical, SD's quotes, or details taken from articles can never be trusted.


Hadn't someone put up a scan of Shapiro's (the author) complete article at some point here?

It is a curious oversight, perhaps by the magazine's editors (see eg the variant spellings of "Monika" and "Monica"), that Shapiro notes going to check hospital admission records for 18th August 1970, not September, in the course of the piece.

Hello again scoutship, thanks for the interesting quote. I can't find a scan of this Shapiro article at CTT, but then again it's a bit like looking for a needle in a haystack, Any chance of a scan of the article?

"first on the scene was Eric's roadie Terry Slater who told Kathy that he and Monika cleared out the flat, going across the road to some adjacent gardens where they buried the drugs. Meanwhile the ambulance drivers arrived to find Jimi dead and alone in the room....Terry said that he and Monica [sic] viewed all this from across the street."

This appears to be Shapiro's report of a report by Kathy of what she claims Slater told her, hardly very reliable info to base anything on. Hardly believable that they would go to the trouble of burying a personal stash, Jimi as far as we know was not a dope dealer;). Slater, if indeed he did tell Kathy this, is the only witness that he was there, apart from Stickells' vague statement to Shapiro where he "remembers" (twenty years later) that Slater called him between 8 and 9 that there was "trouble with Jimi at the hotel."

johanincr
07-05-11, 03:23 PM
I notice 'deniers' has now turned into 'doubters'.

That is giving yourself a bit too much credit Scrum Drum. If you disagree, provide evidence please.

According to your nomenclature, i'm afraid here you wont find 'smart people','people who are genuinely interested' in it and all sorts of other descriptions you assume, i assume, apply to yourself.

Since YOU are as closed-minded as 'they' come, you never were open to anyone else's info or views, isnt it, dont expect too much in terms of serious debate. In fact you've had more chance of that than i ever thought possible.

What are you trying to prove, anyway, and more importantly, WHY? Do you feel you changed a lot of minds?

And what will you do if we all accept the SD gospel as truth, go on with the same bloody thing on Elvis, Michael Jackson, Brian Jones? Thats a serious question!

Before i answer the direct arguments/points, what was the TV show again that Chas made the 'head blown off' comment on? Too much!

Scrum Drum
07-05-11, 03:32 PM
^ It's kind of pathetic seeing STP scramble for cheap evasions while being so visibly unable to answer the basic arguments I made.


It's obvious that both Slater's statements and STP's public inability to answer them show the truth that the call was made from the payphone across the street as Kathy's investigation discovered. STP's responses are so void of truthful substance that they are worthless.


People should be smart enough by now to realize STP relies on doubting everybody and every thing - which is a form that in and of itself should clue people by now about his credibility.

Scrum Drum
07-05-11, 03:33 PM
I Before i answer the direct arguments/points, what was the TV show again that Chas made the 'head blown off' comment on? Too much!



Just answer the direct arguments.


It was an evening talk show directly following the Southbank Show Chas had just appeared on.

kdion11
07-05-11, 03:37 PM
Just answer the direct arguments.


It was an evening talk show directly following the Southbank Show Chas had just appeared on.

KD: Sounds sort of vague and unidentifiable ! Just answer the questions !

johanincr
07-05-11, 03:38 PM
Just answer the direct arguments.


It was an evening talk show directly following the Southbank Show Chas had just appeared on.

I'll answer them as vaguely as you do, then. Then will you answer my serious questions too?

Jimi's heart stopped beating at some point. Thats how he died. Exactly how he died. I'm not doubting or denying that. Now answer my direct questions please, i didnt type them out for my own fun only.

stplsd
07-05-11, 03:39 PM
Bannister's statement that he "unplugged a cork of vomit from Jimi's windpipe, upon which masses of red wine then issued out"

And where exactly does Bannister say this? I'll hazard a guess and say nowhere, apart from your own overworked imagination;)

kdion11
07-05-11, 03:51 PM
I've just scanned the various pages from the 1996 Musician Magazine
article on Jimi's death and will be trying to format them correctly
so they can be added here for viewing. Chilling read.

Best part is the coda at the end:

"On October 30th, 1995 we spoke with Dannemann, who agreed to receive
20 questions from us via fax, just before press time, she declined via fax to
address any of the questions noting "I can see no reason why I should have to defend
myself before persons who question the veracity of my words.............."

They look ok on my computer, hope they come out OK.

KD

kdion11
07-05-11, 03:54 PM
^ It's kind of pathetic seeing STP scramble for cheap evasions while being so visibly unable to answer the basic arguments I made.


It's obvious that both Slater's statements and STP's public inability to answer them show the truth that the call was made from the payphone across the street as Kathy's investigation discovered. STP's responses are so void of truthful substance that they are worthless.


People should be smart enough by now to realize STP relies on doubting everybody and every thing - which is a form that in and of itself should clue people by now about his credibility.

KD: That's funny, the Musician Magazine article from 1996 says that the call for the ambulance came from the Samarkand
Hotel !

Who to believe ? What a quandry !

Scrum Drum
07-05-11, 04:00 PM
And where exactly does Bannister say this? I'll hazard a guess and say nowhere, apart from your own overworked imagination;)


Here's where STP gets firmly hung by his own petard.


Since we know the ambulance attendants confirmed they witnessed a hard plug of vomit in the person we can prove was Jimi Hendrix, and that they stated they could not penetrate this hardened blockage of vomit with their equipment, therefore we know the person whom those attendants delivered to Dr Bannister possessed this plug of vomit. Honest people whose sole basis isn't obnoxiously playing denial games with a serious matter would realize the evidence shows us Bannister would have no option but to have removed the plug of vomit already identified in Jimi Hendrix. Combine this with the scarf seen around Jimi's neck in Monika's photos and we have more than enough cross-reference to this man being Jimi Hendrix.

We can now reasonably conclude all evidence points towards the man Bannister suctioned "bottles worth" of wine out of as being Jimi Hendrix. And therefore can proceed to apply the appropriate medical forensic analysis to this witnessed wine without any further credulous denial of the wine and its forensic significance.

stplsd
07-05-11, 04:00 PM
I've just scanned the various pages from the 1996 Musician Magazine article on Jimi's death and will be trying to format them correctly so they can be added here for viewing. Chilling read.


Looking forward to it KD:)

Hope someone can come up with a scan of the Classic Rock aricle by Shapiro too

stplsd
07-05-11, 04:19 PM
This is where you are clearly shown to be inventing quotes yet again


Here's where STP gets firmly hung by his own petard.
It's "hoist (it means ‘blown up’ SD) with" not "hung by" you just can't get your quotes right. How can you get "firmly hung" (mmm, hello sailor!;)) by a bomb!


Bannister's statement that he "unplugged a cork of vomit from Jimi's windpipe, upon which masses of red wine then issued out"
And where exactly does Bannister say this? I'll hazard a guess and say nowhere, apart from your own overworked imagination

He doesn't state that he "unplugged" anything.
This is what Bannister actually said: "PRIOR TO SUCTION, there was wine and gastric contents exuding from his mouth," ie in a liquid state and mixed, then later in his 1993 Times interview, when told that no one else including the pathologist mentioned wine, "He expressed surprise"... [replying]: "It was coming out of his nose and out of his mouth," ie in both statements there is no "plug", and he's claiming that the wine was there for all to see.


This "plug" scenario is a medical science and Bannister defying invention by SD to attempt to wriggle out of why no-one else saw any wine (obviously not noticing the above statements). SD claims that a hitherto unobserved medical miracle took place. That as Jimi was "waterboarded", so he claims, he vomited, inhaling some (he would have been inhaling wine from the start as well don't forget) then the rest of his lungs filled with wine, almost to the point of death (claiming that Jimi didn't swallow up to that point, so wine didn't go into his stomach), then, nearly dead (he would have been stone dead already with the vomit down to "the smaller bronchi" and the claimed very large amount of wine in his lungs), managed to vomit again (copiously this time) which "corked" in the large amount of wine, then "masses" more wine just by-passed the large amount of vomit and went into his stomach but didn't mix with the other contents. A vomit/wine/vomit "plug"/wine/other stomach contents, a miracle sandwich. Then Bannister's "medical staff" ie the nurses (so far unidentified and likely to remain so.), after the other two doctors had left, (Bannister said Jimi was obviously long dead, DOA) spent half an hour, in an apparenty busy casualty ward, managing to suck out all the wine, miraculously leaving behind the contents of a "medium sized meal" and vomited material in the lungs down to the smaller bronchi - nearly half a litre in one - for Teare to discover .
This is how SD explains that red wine wasn't found in his lungs and stomach contents at the autopsy. He can't rationally explain how the wine in his lungs didn't mix significantly with the vomit and that in the stomach didn't mix with the remains of a medium sized meal there. He can't rationally explain the biological miracle that created his allegedly clearly demarcated 5 tier vomit and wine sandwich. (One could almost think from SD's scenario that Bannister was part of the conspiracy - waiting till the other main witnesses had left, then removing the evidence;))
Nevermind that Bannister said that, prior to suction, it was in a liquid state anyway, flowing out of his nose and mouth for all to see.
'Death by red wine' requires this bogus scenario and it's series of medical miracles to explain away why no one else saw any wine. Don't forget Jimi was manipulated onto a stretcher, up an awkward staircase, driven at high speed round corners and over bumps, manhandled into the casualty, with all the sloshing around of his stomach contents that would neccessarily entail, and the ambulance crew, who claimed he was dead (for an article in Straight Ahead), yet claiming to have worked on him till they got to the hospital. SD's idea for his "plug" fantasy came because the crew said they couldn't get the aspirator through the vomit which they say "went all the way down," "there was a hell of a lot of it" "couldn't shift that lot" claiming it was dry, but then again that he was lying in a "pool" of vomit ie it was still liquid. Bannister on the other hand only says it was in a liquid state and wine was clearly visible (with other gastric contents) flowing out his nose and mouth.

scoutship
07-05-11, 04:36 PM
Well I've still to solve how to scan then move the file over to where it can be uploaded (new scanner last year but've not had nor made time to decipher the manual, novel set up for me), but will look into it this evening and see if I can post the Shapiro piece by sometime tomorrow (Seattle time of course).

Rupe
07-05-11, 04:36 PM
You can read the Classic Rock article on http://archive.classicrockmagazine.com/ Search the Archives for August 2009

scoutship
07-05-11, 04:39 PM
Btw the 46mg / ml (therefore Teare's 100mg / ml estimate) comes from Noel, who'd obtained a copy of the coroner's report.

I know at least one other copy of the coroner's report is floating about but I've not one in my possession. Didn't foresee such a tool as the internet back when I had the chance to scan over it, as with so much else, ah well.

scoutship
07-05-11, 04:43 PM
You can read the Classic Rock article on http://archive.classicrockmagazine.com/ Search the Archives for August 2009

Ha ha that'll save some time and an aspirin, thanks.

Here's the direct link to the article then:

The Mysterious Death of Jimi Hendrix (http://archive.classicrockmagazine.com/view/august-2009/44/was-jimi-hendrix-murdered-by-a-manager-with-an-mi5-past-and-debts-to-the-mafia-hendrix-biographer)

Was he murdered by a manager with an MI5 past and debts to the Mafia?

stplsd
07-05-11, 04:45 PM
You can read the Classic Rock article on http://archive.classicrockmagazine.com/ Search the Archives for August 2009

Nice one Rupe! Cheers:)

scoutship
07-05-11, 04:52 PM
Thank you for showing us you can't answer the direct arguments. (You'll have much company here).




Aw Scrum I'll be charitable and just point out that unanswered questions do NOT equal "evidence" for murder.

Nor does correllation equal causation.

The bulk of your approach reeks of the 'god of the gaps' mode of "thought" many religious and other cult-follower types cling to when they've as much invested emotionally, rather than rationally, as your long and winding 'chasing after wind' screeds indicate you do. Hence I won't waste time responding to your "direct arguments" as you call them---others may use a somewhat different term---until some actual evidence emerges from the flotsam & jetsam of the conspiracy theorist black tides. But thanks and good luck with that.

stplsd
07-05-11, 04:55 PM
"Hendrix biographer Harry Shapiro talks to former roadie James ‘Tappy’ Wright and reconsiders the mysteries surrounding Jimi Hendrix’s death…"

Oh feck, now I remember why I didn't buy this, Tappy Wright, gie uz a break!
It's not actually a promo for Tappy as I thought, well, not too much;) it's got some interesting new bits from old Shapiro interviews, although most of it's just rehashed stuff we've all read before, some of it's a bit sloppy in the detail.

now that I remember there's another (thinly disguised) promo for his book in. . . Classic Rock! something about how crazy JHE 1968 tour was, including some dodgy, lurid tales by Tappy, sure Shapiro contributes too. It's definitely here at CTT 'coz I slagged it off big time;)

scoutship
07-05-11, 05:00 PM
Here's where STP gets firmly hung by his own petard.


Since we know the ambulance attendants confirmed they witnessed a hard plug of vomit in the person we can prove was Jimi Hendrix, and that they stated they could not penetrate this hardened blockage of vomit with their equipment, therefore we know the person whom those attendants delivered to Dr Bannister possessed this plug of vomit.


Seriously, that's quite comical, point to Scrum for entertainment value there.

Love to see a computer-image reenactment of the vomit plug going in after to cap the wine which was also in his hair and such, according to which bits of the various statements on record one selects and distorts per need.

kdion11
07-05-11, 06:57 PM
Sharon Lawrence - Jimi Hendrix The Intimate Story Of A Betrayed Musical Legend - Pages 263-264:




In 1996 Monika Dannemann telephoned me for the final time. I felt instantly furious when I picked up the telephone and heard her softly say "It's Monika." How can anyone manage to put sadness behind when there's always some creep unexpectedly bringing it all back into focus? What could she possibly want now? Had she forgotten the legal warning she'd instructed her solicitors to issue? How could she possibly think I would consider her a friend? She started in once more pushing her desire that I should "come and visit... I really need to talk to you. Can you come next week?

I couldn't believe my ears. I'd had enough of her and I let loose. "I don't want to ever see or speak to you again. You've told too many lies through too many years. How can you possibly believe I would want to be your friend?

She began to stammer at the vehemence of my tone. "Oh, is this a b b-bad time to t t-talk?"

I felt somehow that things had gone terribly wrong for Monika and that she was in some kind of trouble. But I didn't care, and I didn't want details. "You helped to kill a friend of mine. You showed no respect to Jimi Hendrix. He lay there in layers of his own vomit for hours and you let him die."

I could hear myself yelling into the telephone, and I felt shocked by my own anger. You could have called a doctor. An ambulance. The police. The hotel manager. But you didn't. The very next morning, you told me what happened, but you didn't tell me everything! When he was choking, gasping for breath, did you pour red wine down his throat?

There was a long pause. I took a stab at something I'd discussed with Jack Meehan after his conversation with the coroner and had subsequently puzzled over for years. "I know you did, I said."

"It was all untidy. He was messy. I thought it would help," Monika haltingly explained. I could just imagine her running off to wash her hands because the dying man was "untidy".

"You made it all worse."

She let out a series of hysterical shrieks, but she did not deny my words. I kept at her. "You could have gotten help that would have saved him. But you made a choice, and you have been lying about all of it ever since." Monika was sobbing now, but she managed to interrupt her sobs to say, "Stop! You're going to give me a heart attack."

"That's an impossibility!" I yelled. "You have no heart. No conscience. You barely knew Jimi Hendrix and you let him die."

"No!"

"You and your sick charade," I said, quieting down. I had never spoken to another human being like that before.

She was quiet too. The sobs had vanished.

"Don't you ever telephone me or contact me in any way ever again. You are a cruel and terrible person. And a goddamned liar!"

Monika Dannemann moaned into my ear on the telephone; it was terrible to hear. Finally she said, "I am sorry. Believe me, I am sorry." I couldn't listen to another word. I hung up and two days later I took the advice of friends and changed my phone number.




Sharon didn't realize she had made a critical mistake and misinterpreted the evidence. In a way Monika was as much a victim as Jimi was. Sharon didn't realize the golden opportunity she had to be the only person to get Monika to talk. She should have seized upon the request and befriended Monika. Monika was reaching out to her. Sharon had a golden chance to earn Monika's trust and get the real story from her mouth. Monika was reaching-out and Sharon slammed the door in her face.

What Sharon doesn't realize above is that Monika was making a quick excuse about tidying Jimi up with wine. If Sharon had a better grasp of the evidence she would realize Jimi was never tidy-ed up and was covered in unwashed vomit. What this shows is when Monika made quick excuses about washing Jimi with wine she was doing so to divert attention from the fact Jimi had been murdered with wine. There was obviously no washing with wine. Sharon took Monika literally and didn't realize she was lying. Sharon thought she had uncovered a scandalous revelation of Monika admitting she had poured wine into a choking, dying Hendrix. She missed a subtle clue though. Monika protested loudly "NO!" What Sharon failed to interpret was that indeed Monika hadn't poured wine into Jimi, other people had. Monika knew it but couldn't tell the whole story. When Sharon says Monika didn't deny it she doesn't understand that Monika couldn't admit the whole thing so she didn't necessarily deny it but didn't tell the real reason either. That's why she protested "NO!". It's also why she was so strong in defending herself legally because she knew she wasn't exactly guilty of what people were accusing her of but couldn't tell why.

It's amazing people don't see the simple fact that Monika is claiming she cleaned Jimi up with wine but any simple look at the scene would show that Jimi wasn't cleaned-up and was covered in grotesque amounts of vomit. That means Monika was lying about cleaning-up Jimi with wine. Well, why would she do that? And the answer is because she knew the wine had been used to murder Hendrix and needed an excuse for it.


KD: Wait a minute............. First you say that an INTEL Hit Team "waterboarded" Jimi to death and now you're taking arch lier Monica on "her word" that she poured the wine down Jimi's throat. You can't have it both ways dude - Oh never mind...............

kdion11
07-05-11, 06:58 PM
^ Scrum arnt you worried that Jimi's killers will seek you out for eposing THE FACTS? ;)


KD: Yep, they're going to track him down and blow his damn head off !

kdion11
07-05-11, 07:01 PM
Looking forward to it KD:)

Hope someone can come up with a scan of the Classic Rock aricle by Shapiro too

They should come in tomorrow - gotta dash. I'm having trouble though reformatting them
from the saved PDF to JPG - anyone want to help with this ?

Help !