Thanks Duke Facts really matter, especially when the dead can't defend themselves against the inaccuracies of the Internet.

So many good things about the web but the BS really gets to a number of actual Hendrix friends in UK and US including a number of fine musicians who still miss Jimi. I'm glad Mitch Mitchell doesn't have to put up with this crap anymore. He hated the "Estate," the "specialists" and all the baloney that came after Jimi's death.

Quote
stonesrule
Naturalust

Glad you appreciate my friend Hendrix but some of those off the top of your head thoughts above are not very accurate. Jimi met Janie twice...briefly. She was six years old, and in his worst nightmares he could never have imagined she would be re-mixing the hell out of his music and that's just one of the sins she has committed in his name. The whole Hendrix "Estate" and "Legacy" are one of the saddest stories that ever happened in the name of music.

FYI, Jimi was the father of two children he never saw, by two different women. He wanted the best for them but that just didn't happen.

not sure where I was inaccurate. I was talking about his other daughter, not Jaine. And who can speculate on what Jimi would have wanted? Alan Douglas did many things that Jimi would not have approved, rather family than some fat cat jazz dude. I worked with AD and helped mix the video version of "Are You Experienced" , right before someone else took control. I talked with him. I do know a bit about the subject.
peace.

The next french issue of Rolling Stone translated some good pages from the book of Caesar Glebbeek "Last Weeks of Jimi Hendrix".



YM

I wrote a rebuttal to Caesar's publication 'Until We Meet Again'.


The best way I can put it is that Caesar spent 50 pages going out of his way to distort and ignore witnessings in order to pronounce that the wine business was "bs". Caesar goes to lengths to try to deny the existence of the wine witnessed by many, including Dr Bannister. At the end he prides himself that he has "debunked the wine myth". However he forgets a very important thing. When Sharon Lawrence spoke to Monika a few weeks before her death she confronted Monika about the wine. Monika, having never been asked this directly before, was shocked at the question and proceeded to moan and whine as if it was a painful subject. Monika then told Sharon that she "washed 'sick' off Jimi's face with wine." She then changed the subject and never spoke about it again. You see, Monika knew the wine was used to murder Jimi. That's why she reacted that way. So while Caesar spends 50 pages trying to convince us Monika's word was gospel and everyone else was lying or incompetent, in his so-called end-all "investigation," he forgets that the wine was confirmed by Monika herself. Of course, I'm sure that Caesar, who now considers himself a God-like authority on not only Jimi but also reality, will simply scoff and proclaim his way around this, however smart people will see Caesar for what he is and what he is doing in 'Until We Meet Again'. He even has the gall to try and confirm Monika's 10:20am wake-up time as told in the official story at the Inquest.

My rebuttal starts at post #106:


[forum.davidicke.com]


.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-24 01:18 by ScrumDrum.

Quote
stones78

Quote
Yazid Manou
In few days, we'll know how Jimi really died.

We do already, don't we? He choked in his own vomit, the rest is bullshit. Who ever believes all these "conspiracy" stuff about his manager killing him or whatever are idiots anyway. Interesting how you or the author called other people that wrote books or whatever "experts" sarcastically or "self-appointed part-time amateur sleuths" yet this guy calls himself "the number one Hendrix specialist"...
Can't you all just leave the poor guy alone, he's been dead for 40 years.

No, Dr Bannister said Jimi was full of an unusually large amount of red wine. He didn't choke on his vomit, he was drowned in wine when incapacitated by sleeping pills. The rest isn't bullshit. It conforms to a trail of evidence that involved Jimi being witnessed trying to get rid of Michael Jeffery all the way back to his first team meeting with Mitch, Noel, Chas and Jeffery in January 1969. That same month Jimi then meets a blonde German woman named Monika Dannemann. Jimi commented that although they had agreed at that meeting that Chas would take-over and Michael Jeffery would be removed from management nothing changed. What most Hendrix fans are completely ignorant of is the fact Jimi then defined his relationship to the band in terms of getting rid of Jeffery from then on. He broke-up the Experience and retired to the Catskills in a move to discourage Jeffery's management. Jeffery finally took action on this by having Manhattan mafia goons intimidate Jimi into cooperation by firing guns in his backyard at the Ashokan House.

Anyone who claims a true understanding of Hendrix history would know Jimi was busy working Michael Jeffery out of his management in his final week. He consulted Alan Douglas for hours and even visited Chas at the Montague Square flat 2 nights before his death. Chas was so aware of how this visit was connected to Jimi's death that he denied it even happened when approached by the media. Typical of the conflicting nightmare of accounts involved with this subject, Chas forgot that he had already described the visit in enthusiastic detail to BBC in their 1995 'Wink Of An Eye'. Chas lied because he knew Jimi's effort to get him to produce again got him killed by Jeffery. 12 hours before Jimi was murdered he sat Monika down in a chair at the Cumberland and had her witness him firing Jeffery in a phone call to his New York Lawyer Henry Steingarten.

Anyone who intelligently follows the evidence in this case can clearly see Jimi was murdered by Jeffery for exactly the reasons Tappy Wright told. It's fairly clear who the "idiots" are and what is "bullshit". You simply can't have lungs and stomach drowned in large amounts of wine and only have a 1/16th of a legal driving limit blood alcohol content. That in itself is forensic proof of murder for those who bother to engage in critical thinking. And saying "Bannister was a fraud and was struck-off" won't cut it or serve as an excuse for not admitting this.

Caesar's an evil liar and you can see exactly what he's deliberately leaving-out in order to avoid admitting it. And don't be fooled that he isn't aware of all this stuff. Any "number 1 Hendrix specialist" has no excuse for either not knowing this or omitting it from any genuine investigation.

All you need to know about this matter is that the thread goes up by over 300 visits but none of those trashing the subject could back-up their words against what I wrote. If you ever wondered how Jimi's murder could go unsolved for so long look no further than what you see here...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-26 22:31 by ScrumDrum.

So it wasn't Lee Harvey Oswald then?

Quote
GravityBoy
So it wasn't Lee Harvey Oswald then?

I always hold that those who troll the murderous victimization of Jimi Hendrix are some of the lowest forms of life on Earth...

Thank You.

Quote
stonesrule
Thank You.

No offense, but although 'Stonesrule' talks a tough talk in this thread he doesn't seem to ever commit to a position on the evidence behind Jimi's murder.

I'd like to confront that major coward and Judas Caesar Glebbeek on this but he hides in his evil UniVibes castle and doesn't come out to answer for his easily disproven crap.

scrumdrum

better listen to stonesrule

she not he

and she knew Jimi well

Thanks Duke.

This "scum drum" newbie is aware of that and is just another attention-

seeking stalker. Bastard!

stonesrule's credibility is directly related to the facts I cited.


Her inability to answer them directly speaks the most about her.


Sorry, that's how it works.


(You'll notice nobody challenged or disproved anything I wrote)

Quote
stonesrule
Thanks Duke.

This "scum drum" newbie is aware of that and is just another attention-

seeking stalker. Bastard!

That's ridiculous. I'm a newbie. Therefore I have no idea who you are.


There's a truth logarithm here that the more somebody who claims credibility ignores facts right in front of their face by means of teenage girl protests over stalkers (which is ridiculous in itself) the more those facts stand as true.

I've dealt with many people who assign themselves great self-appointed Hendrix credibility but then delude themselves that the real reason they can't answer isn't because they simple can't answer.

I'm sorry but if you really did know Jimi you're no friend of his if you deny the obvious truth behind his murder. Calling someone a stalker because you are woefully incapable of answering basic evidence in Jimi's death is somewhat pathetic isn't it?

Answer me a simple question stonesrule. How much does being a personal friend of Jimi's allow one to ignore the basic evidence behind his murder like you are doing? Or are you incapable of understanding it? Or just in outright denial?

I think this is pathetically obvious at this point.

There's not one person who can disprove what I said. Especially Caesar.

The FACTS behind your stalking say it all.

The authorities are now aware of your various attempts to contact and ingratiate yourself with me, including your email efforts and web activity. All this directly related to the death of Jimi Hendrix.


Obviously you did not suddenly join this Forum to talk about your appreciation of The Rolling Stones. Lucky them.

Enough! No more attention from me. Unless it's a lawsuit.

..........

ROCKMAN



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-27 03:25 by Rockman.

Quote
stonesrule
The FACTS behind your stalking say it all.

The authorities are now aware of your various attempts to contact and ingratiate yourself with me, including your email efforts and web activity. All this directly related to the death of Jimi Hendrix.


Obviously you did not suddenly join this Forum to talk about your appreciation of The Rolling Stones. Lucky them.

Enough! No more attention from me. Unless it's a lawsuit.

Oh, I know who you are now. I thought that might be you because I recognized the shallow response.

I found this site by Googling Caesar Glebbeek. I'm not computer savvy, but I could prove it in my hard drive and ISP record. I'm an easy-going person and don't like legal pettyness, however I also don't like being falsely accused of stalking. I found this site in my efforts to locate web entries by Caesar Glebbeek and can prove it in my Google search entries located on my hard drive. That should be obvious from my first posts.

Geesh, I think somebody here has an inflated sense of their own ego. I also think somebody is fooling themselves with this embarrassing bluster into thinking that they're not just pathetically, publicly unable to answer basic information about Jimi's death.

It's rather typical of the metaphysical grace that surrounded Jimi that somebody who had the nerve to accuse others of "betraying" Jimi was one of the biggest betrayers herself when it came down to Jimi needing them the most. You can run but you can't hide from the truth, reality, and the murder evidence. Somebody needs to take their book profits and buy a clue.

You're obviously a fool and I'll be the better man and save you further self-embarrassment. I will, however, protect my reputation if slandered.

Quote
ScrumDrum
Geesh, I think somebody here has an inflated sense of their own ego. I also think somebody is fooling themselves with this embarrassing bluster into thinking that they're not just pathetically, publicly unable to answer basic information about Jimi's death.

You're obviously a fool and I'll be the better man and save you further self-embarrassment. I will, however, protect my reputation if slandered.

The only one pathetic here is you, hiding behind a screen-name and acccuse other people of being liars, and think that stonesrule would like to discuss or participate in some kind of homemade murdertheory on a Rolling Stones message board. After all, most of us knows who stonesrule is, while you are just an anonymous stalker, who obviously loves to accuse people with a name, credibility and authority on things that nobody could come up with evidence for.

I guess that's one of the bad sides of the new internet world; strangers throwing out hypothesises which can't be proven wrong or proven right, and digging out accusations on people who's not hiding behind an alias

Of course nobody here can confirm or disconfirm your dramatic claims. Only those who actually were there, could. Some years ago we had a "Miss U" here, claiming to have evidence for Brian Jones being murdered, and the case going to court again...yada yada yada; suddenly we heard no more for her. At least she didn't accuse other IORR members of being liars, just because that her own imagination had ran off with her in her longing for making crimetheories on dead rockstars, allthough she was never there at the time. You 2 would make good friends.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-27 07:38 by Erik_Snow.

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
ScrumDrum
Geesh, I think somebody here has an inflated sense of their own ego. I also think somebody is fooling themselves with this embarrassing bluster into thinking that they're not just pathetically, publicly unable to answer basic information about Jimi's death.

You're obviously a fool and I'll be the better man and save you further self-embarrassment. I will, however, protect my reputation if slandered.

The only one pathetic here is you, hiding behind a screen-name and acccuse other people of being liars, and think that stonesrule would like to discuss or participate in some kind of homemade murdertheory on a Rolling Stones message board. After all, most of us knows who stonesrule is, while you are just an anonymous stalker. I guess that's one of the bad sides of the new internet world; strangers throwing out hypothesises which can't be proven wrong or proven right, and digging out accusations on people who's not hiding behind an alias

Of course nobody here can confirm or disconfirm your dramatic claims. Only those who actually were there, could. Some years ago we had a "Miss U" here, claiming to have evidence for Brian Jones being murdered, and the case going to court again...yada yada yada; suddenly we heard no more for her. At least she didn't accuse other IORR members of being liars, just because that her own imagination had ran off with her in her longing for making crimetheories on dead rockstars, allthough she was never there at the time. You 2 would make good friends.

Ah, but you see this serves your purpose of avoiding the facts I spoke of. I didn't come in here for an argument with stonesrule. Obviously having never posted on here I had no idea who she was. Again, your input is just site friends defending each other. My input, on the other hand, is the most credible material in here yet you flagrantly ignore it in order to dwell on off-topic evasions. Sorry, but anyone who had a credible understanding of the on-topic subject of this thread would realize I possess a very credibly studied understanding of this topic gathered from the most credible sources available. Actually, I can reasonably prove what I contended. As a matter of fact I've been asking people to try and credibly challenge it. Like yourself, nobody has been able to.

Because you treat this matter in such a superficial way you're probably unaware that Caesar Glebbeek committed a rogue offense against Jimi Hendrix in a special publication last September. Caesar is very much a liar as I proved in the rebuttal I linked. Again, while you blindly protest you probably don't realize I've proven that Caesar lied. So you can make-up all the excuses you want but you're still not answering the evidence I've provided. I don't hesitate to point-out I still maintain a 100% rate of people not being able to disprove anything I wrote. The reason for that is because it's true.

You've called me an anonymous stalker. That's ridiculous. I stand by what I wrote and why I wrote it. My purpose is to do justice for Jimi Hendrix. Anyone with any sincere or serious understanding of Jimi and what happened to him would see that in what I wrote.

You see if we could actually discuss the information and evidence, I think we would make better progress on showing this evidence is real and proves Jimi was murdered instead of getting hung-up in this meaningless back and forth that is being successfully used to avoid serious discussion of the topic. If you're incapable or intellectually unable to discuss this OK, but don't try to say my evidence is faulty. Your entries are too overly general and evasive to carry the point you attempt. My input is fact specific. So specific you couldn't answer it.

There's something that needs to made clear here. Jimi Hendrix did not commit suicide. Now if we could somehow manage to conduct a civilized discussion of Caesar's work I could show that the evidence he lied around forms a pattern that indicates murder.

Try an easy one. Just answer what the wine shows according to the forensics. Go ahead it won't bite you. Try answering the facts. They're pretty clearly shown and easy to understand.

Quote
ScrumDrum
You've called me an anonymous stalker. That's ridiculous.

Of course you are. Where can one look up Scrumdrum in the phone book? Duh

Quote
ScrumDrum
My input is fact specific. So specific you couldn't answer it.

Of course I can't, and that makes me suspicious about that is the exact reason for you to be posting this all accross the web; because nobody can confirm or disconfirm

Quote
ScrumDrum
Your entries are too overly general and evasive to carry the point you attempt.

My post above is general because what I wrote is true. It's not just a wordgame.