Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
After stopping at the Cumberland Hotel Monika and Jimi followed Phillip Harvey and his two teenage girlfriends over to his comfortable townhouse. What ensued was an evening get together where they rolled joints and drank wine with Jimi receiving the pampering attention of the two girls. Jimi finally sequestered off into a room with one of the girls which understandably set Monika off into a screaming tantrum. Harvey said Monika screamed at Jimi outside the townhouse for nearly an hour causing him concern that his high class neighbors might summon the police. Eventually Jimi apologized to Harvey and left with Monika. A better more detailed version of this is offered in Tony Brown's book Hendrix - The Final Days. Harvey only came out with this story after his Member Of Parliament father died in the 1990's.
From here Monika claims she and Jimi proceeded back to the Samarkand, however some people close to Jimi speculate Monika may have dropped Jimi off at the Cameron party on the way. As usual, Monika's account of her and Jimi arriving back at the Samarkand at 8:30 is highly unreliable and contradicted by other accounts. What is most-likely is the Harvey party lasted past 10pm (as Harvey indicated) and Monika then dropped Jimi off at the Cameron party nearer to 11pm. Some witnesses at that party say Jimi arrived around that time.
Monika's account said her and Jimi sat talking at the Samarkand until Jimi couldn't put going to the Cameron party off any longer. She says she then dropped Jimi off at Cameron's at around 2am with the instructions to return in a half-hour to pick him up. She claims Jimi only went to the party to tell Devon Wilson to lay-off Monika.
Jimi's friends at the Cameron party told a different story. They said Jimi arrived before midnight and stayed until 3am. Their version of events is that Jimi's fashion store owner friend Collette ordered Chinese take-out because Jimi was hungry. Researchers say this time frame is backed-up by the fact Chinese take-outs were not open late at night in London in 1970. The rice in this meal is important because it was found in Jimi's stomach during the autopsy and relates directly to the forensically-determined time of death.
Witnesses said Monika showed up sometime around 2am and started buzzing the intercom trying to get Jimi out of the party. They said Jimi declined. This caused Monika to continue buzzing. Soon the guests were out on the balcony telling Monika to "fuck-off, Jimi doesn't want you here". Some participants later expressed guilt over the way Monika was treated. Eventually Monika won out and Jimi left near 3am. What I have found out about recently is David Henderson interviewed guests who said Jimi asked Devon to leave with him at this time. Now this is important because Monika is selling Jimi as going to get rid of Devon in order to protect her. If Jimi had tried to bring Devon along this adds some very peculiar dimensions to this tale. Equally peculiar is the fact Devon declined, allegedly because she was too high. This also conflicts with what we know because the story has it that Devon was trying to break-up Jimi's relationship with Monika, so it doesn't make sense Devon would turn down a golden opportunity like that. Unless of course Jimi was trying to bring her along for one last show-down with Monika present in order to reinforce the point. But we don't know because we can't rely on Monika for the truth. We'll never know why Jimi tried to bring Devon along. Perhaps it was to protect him from Monika?
From here we now go to the infamous Samarkand death scenario story told by Monika. Her official story describes Jimi and her returning to talk in bed with Jimi lecturing her on his personal philosophy and cosmic symbolism. She claims she fell asleep with her head resting on Jimi's chest around 7am. She then tells the infamous story of waking up around 11am and finding Jimi OK and then going for cigarettes. When she came back she said she noticed a small trickle of vomit on Jimi's chin and couldn't wake him. She then goes into her phoning Jimi's friends story telling of how she tried to get Jimi's personal doctor and ended up talking to Eric Burdon. She then says she went in the ambulance with Jimi around 11:30am and he was still alive. Later they pronounced him dead at the Hospital.
Intense research by many people, including Michael Fairchild and Kathy Etchingham, as well as Tony Brown, proved beyond a doubt that Monika's story was false. The real breakthrough came in 1986 when Eric Burdon wrote in his book I Used To Be An Animal But I'm OK Now that Monika called him "just as the first light of dawn was coming through my window". I checked the London almanac and this would be near 5:40am. So if we consider Monika's panic time and efforts to make contact with Jimi's doctor before she finally reached Burdon we can reasonably assume Jimi was murdered somewhere near 4:30am. Burdon later added "that it may have been even earlier than that. In the early hours of the morning".
Those research efforts found that Burdon had called Jeffery's road crew employees and had Terry Slater, Eric Barrett, and Gerry Stickells all show-up at the Samarkand in order to clear it out. Of course Monika witnessed all of this so her story to the official Inquest was obviously a concocted cover-story to prevent the authorities from knowing what really happened. The bizarre thing about Monika's version of events is Burdon's admission came-out in 1986, however Monika still gave the cover-story version in 1995 when Inner World was published. Even when she had no hope of getting away with this story Monika still tried to do so. She tried to indirectly explain away Burdon's admission by saying he was heavily indulging in drugs that night, however by doing so Monika once again confirmed her delusional grasp of reality, for surely there was too much corroborating evidence for any normal person to hope to overcome. Monika tried to stick with the official story even when everything else that was known at the time said otherwise. And even after she herself admitted "there was evidence that could not be brought to the police and that the mafia did it 'for sure' ".
Monika's writing gives hints as to what really happened that will be shown in the next post.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
12-03-2011, 11:30 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-03-2011, 11:54 PM by Albert Doyle.)
If you are interested in seeing a large offering of poisonous deception all contained in one vessel read Dannemann's "Afterword" section in Inner World. This final chapter really stands the truth on its head and contains one of the worst attempts to reverse guilt onto others I have ever witnessed.
Page 176:
Monika glosses-over how some German doctors determined Jimi didn't have enough barbiturate in him to be a fatal dose. She says Jimi didn't die by fatal dose but died instead from an obstruction of the throat for which she blames the doctors for not performing a tracheotomy. I have to explain context here. Monika is well aware Jimi was murdered so she is pretending to be confused over how Jimi died. She then writes:
" Given the way Jimi died, I felt something must have gone terribly wrong, but I couldn't put my finger on what it was.
Soon afterwards I received a phone call. A man told me to keep quiet about everything concerning Jimi's death, or else something nasty could happen to me. I have no idea who it was or why I got this call, but at that time only a few people knew where I was staying. "
Well, why would anyone threaten Monika if Jimi died by accident? What Monika is obviously doing here is a childish attempt to make it look like there was a murder mystery involved that she was unaware of but being affected by. As if she is trying to expose us to clues instead of being the person directly in possession of the real clues herself. It's kind of pathetic. Monika knows exactly why that person called. In order to shut her up about her witnessing of Jeffery's murdering Jimi. Typically, pathetically, she's trying to clue us to Jimi's murder while trying to exonerate herself at the same time.
In the 'Afterword' section Monika keeps emphasizing police and investigators telling her to keep quiet and not speak about the death. I think what Monika is doing here is trying to show us she was told to shut-up, and not necessarily by just the police. Another thing Monika emphasizes many times in this section is how the newspapers mis-reported the facts of Jimi's death saying he was at an orgy and died of a heroin overdose. Monika then insists she tried to correct the record by holding press conferences and going to newspapers to give the 'real' account and that each and every time her efforts were frustrated and stopped. This is at least partially true since intel was using the media to smear Jimi in order to promote a political view of him and his lifestyle. Intel had successfully done a character defamation through the newspapers and media to make sure Jimi was seen as having succumbed to his reckless immoral lifestyle. This is COINTELPRO asserting itself to the letter of its text. However Monika is using this process to conceal and make excuses for her own personal false account. What she's trying to hint at is COINTELPRO kept the real evidence behind Jimi's murder from coming out while trying to absolve herself, however Monika is equally guilty of promoting a false version of Jimi's death.
Eric Burdon took Monika along with him to a concert in the northern town of Newcastle - Jeffery's hometown. In Burdon's private rail carriage Monika asked for an aspirin but later realized she had been given a tablet of LSD. Burdon was known for playing this cruel trick on people - including Jimi, however it is possible Monika was dosed in order to keep her from talking. This was one of Jeffery's tricks already done on Billy Cox, and even Jimi at the War Moratorium Concert.
A tabloid then printed a story told by a Lorraine James who told of Jimi being in a totally drugged-out state at an orgy the night before he died. An insurance investigator then discovered this story was completely fabricated. There was no follow-through, retraction, or accountability for this story. What you are looking at is classic CIA COINTELPRO smearing right to the letter of their definition of the program. I'd also like to know what else that insurance investigator found? "Lorraine"??? Isn't that the motel where CIA assassinated Martin Luther King? Was CIA dropping a sinister "playing card" on Jimi's corpse with "Lorraine"?
On Monday the 21st Eric Burdon goes on British TV and boldly claims Jimi committed suicide. Michael Jeffery managed two major acts in his career. One was the Animals, the other was Hendrix. Jeffery ripped both bands off blind. Burdon knew exactly who and what Jeffery was. He went on British TV to claim Jimi committed suicide because he was covering for Jeffery and trying not to get killed himself. Burdon's public claim was meant to send a message to Jeffery that his secret was safe with him. Burdon later regretted making that claim and said he was stoned (sure). To this day Burdon has never publicly told the truth about what really happened in any interview. (CIA will never allow any interview of Burdon)
Monika claims she gave an interview to the German magazine Stern that was never printed. She uses this to indirectly show the information she was trying to provide was censored by higher powers. However what she doesn't tell the reader is after Eric Burdon hid her in a hotel he refused to pay the bill. Monika had no money and it wasn't until a German reporter for the tabloid Bild came to her rescue that her bill was paid. In the cab she was taken away in with the reporter she then gave an interview where she claimed "I gave Jimi the pills". This article was published and contained a photo of Monika and Jimi that experts say only Monika could have provided. Monika later denied this interview.
On page 178 Monika continues her fakery by discussing the autopsy in a way that draws suspicion on an unidentified compound found in Jimi's body. She blames the British system for allowing a post-mortem several days after the death when traces would be lost. She continues her charade by posing herself as being critical of the lack of any genuine investigation at Jimi's Inquest saying that the British Government didn't seem to be interested in investigating the evidence or interviewing anyone who was involved.
Monika then theorizes that the reason all her press conferences were strangely cancelled, and the Inquest made no effort to find the real cause of Jimi's death, and the papers continued to smear him, was because Jeffery was somehow controlling this and trying to prevent people from asking where Jimi's money went. Monika is really exposing herself here because anyone could figure out that Jeffery wasn't some kind of overlord who could control press conferences, Inquests, and newspapers. What Monika is really saying here is intel was keeping Jimi's image soiled and preventing anyone from finding out why he really died. And in this she gives herself away.
Page 180 -
" While I was in New York I spoke to various people Jimi knew and found out that they believed Jimi had been murdered by Mike Jeffery. In their opinion Jimi was worth more to Jeffery dead than alive. As I said earlier, the day before his death Jimi had instructed his lawyer to terminate his management contract with Jeffery. Jeffery and Warner Brothers, the record company, each held a one million dollar life insurance policy on Jimi. Some of Jimi's friends believed he had come too close to finding out where all his money had disappeared. They said it was in Jeffery's interest to silence Jimi, who had made up his mind to leave him and who would have spoken out against him publicly.
These people, some of whom had been close to Jimi, were genuinely frightened of Jeffery. They told me that he had bought the silence of people with money or threats, while others had gone into hiding. "
As with Oswald's attempted call to ONI these paragraphs most-likely resulted in Monika's death. She could have saved the previous 180 pages of rank deception and simply opened the book with these paragraphs to save us time.
Monika goes on to detail a "visit on impulse" to Jeffery's office at Electric Lady Studios in New York. She claimed Jeffery tried to enlist her by offering to make posters out of her photographs of Jimi and also promote her paintings. Here Monika commits another of her psychopathic conflicts by saying she changed hotels to escape Jeffery but then immediately invited Jeffery to the new hotel the next day without registering the non-sensibility involved. Here she claims she confronted Jeffery on trying to buy-off people to prevent revealing how Jimi really died. She said Jeffery tried to answer this by offering her money and a lucrative contract. Monika then fled New York to go visit Jimi's family in Seattle. This was all in February 1971.
I'd have to assume this version is similar to most of what Monika writes and contains a much-altered account to try to vindicate herself. From what I know I'd feel safe interpolating that Monika somehow directly or indirectly witnessed Jeffery murder Hendrix. Her negotiations or even purpose with Jeffery in this visit can only be guessed, however I feel safe assuming, like everything else, it is nowhere near what she claimed. Most likely Monika and Burdon knew Jeffery murdered Hendrix and her discussions with Jeffery were merely her meeting with him to figure out what to do. After all, are we to believe that Monika discusses Jimi's closest friends spelling-out why Jeffery murdered Jimi in the previous paragraphs and then Monika asks us to believe she then went to Jeffery's to chat right afterwards? Like with most of what Monika says, how believable is that? Was Monika going to feel-out a murderer? Did she then invite this murderer, who she says tried to bribe her the day before, to her private hotel room? Sensing the conflict in all this Monika then proceeds to say Jeffery had a very smooth and cunning manner that led people to not suspect the evil person within. Once again, Monika's obviously trying to get around something. She's trying to hide something again. Her actions don't make sense, nor do her excuses for them.
Page 182 -
" ...a couple of other people who knew Jeffery and had seen what had been going on while Jimi was in New York, told me that they believed Jimi had been murdered. There were a couple of reasons for such a suspicion - one being that he had intended leaving Jeffery, the other that he was on the track of his manager's misappropriation of his money. I myself feel that there is a slight possibility Jimi was murdered, especially when I remember the unidentified compound found in his body, and Jeffery's past and the people he associated with.
At the same time I was told that there were certain groups and organizations like the FBI that must have considered Jimi a threat to society because of his potential for strong influence over the younger generation. "
Once again, it is no surprise Monika Dannemann was found dead a year after writing this. She's clearly getting right to the heart of the matter. However, typical of Monika, she's trying to skirt her own knowledge of Jimi's murder at the Samarkand by pointing in the direction of the mysterious compound. We all know Jimi didn't die by untraceable CIA poison. Jimi was brutally drowned in wine while passed-out on a covert mickey. What is more than obvious here is Monika is relieving her guilt while avoiding admitting her own involvement. What she's doing is coming clean about why Jimi was murdered and by whom, but without disclosing her own knowledge and role.
Page 184 -
March 1971. Monika is back in Germany at her father's:
" One day I received a call from an associate of Jeffery's, who warned me to remain silent, or something might happen to me. "
I guess Monika can't name any of these people because of British libel laws, but also probably because it works in her favor to limit the details.
Monika then returns to Notting Hill, London in July 1971 in order to finish her manuscript:
" In both September and October someone broke into my flat. None of the windows was broken: it was as if someone had used a second key. Although no jewellery or money was stolen, the place had been searched in a really professional way. Nothing was in disarray, but the position of some items had been slightly altered......Obviously Jeffery had been curious about what I had been writing. "
What this statement beggars is whether or not the person who had the key during this break-in also had a key the night Jimi died?
" Soon afterwards I received a call from Jeffery himself. He told me that he had heard I was writing a book and that it would be healthier for me to forget about the idea, or something nasty could happen to me. I told him no one could stop me and hung up. A month later the manager (who does not want to be named) of a famous English rock band warned me that he had heard through the grapevine that my life was in danger.
...A couple of months later Devon Wilson died in New York, allegedly from a drug overdose. Some people said it looked like a violent death and believed she was murdered.
Looking for a way out, I finally had an idea. I rang Jeffery and told him I had deposited my manuscript with a lawyer whom I had instructed to publish it in the event of my death. After that I never heard from him again.
A few months later I had a meeting with an English businessman, who stole my manuscript. Only later did I find out that he had close connections with Jimi's manager. "
Monika is clearly spelling-out motives to cover murder evidence. It becomes somewhat unbelievable to think she is offering this full thrust with the suggestion it was being done in order to cover-up her knowledge of covert untraceable poisons. If you interpret the full form of this offering correctly it conforms to Jeffery not wanting Monika to reveal her knowledge of Jimi's waterboarding death. Something of which they were both obviously aware.
" In March 1973 Jeffery allegedly died in a plane crash on a flight to London, where he was to be questioned about the missing millions. To this day some people wonder whether he really died or used his intelligence expertise to make it look as if he had been on that plane, while disappearing to another country. Others believe it is possible that some of his associates had something to do with the crash in order to silence him. "
Yet once again we read words that probably resulted in Monika's death sentence from those people she was indirectly referring to in this paragraph. If Monika wasn't such a brazen liar I might be tempted to think heroically of her here. For surely she lays-out what those who were making the death threats against her were in fear of. What those who speculate Jeffery might have faked his own death don't realize is whether he did or not it still would have involved forces that could arrange a mid-air plane crash. It seems rather silly for these people not to involve that in their thinking. A body was identified by road crew member Barrett with Jeffery's jewelery on it. What Monika hints at, but doesn't say directly, is the only "associates" that could possibly have killed Jeffery by this means is intel, and, most certainly, from what we know, CIA. Yet even once again, it is no surprise Monika Dannemann was found dead from "suicide" a year after writing this. If Monika was guilty of direct involvement in Jimi Hendrix's death, she must have at least partially expiated herself by writing this, if not then certainly by getting killed for it.
Final post to come...
.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
16-03-2011, 07:03 PM
(This post was last modified: 16-03-2011, 08:53 PM by Albert Doyle.)
After posing herself as the sole possessor of true Hendrix information, because of her special proximity to Jimi spelled-out in Inner World, Monika then proceeds to say she eventually became quiet because interviews tended to distort what she was saying. She also claims some article and books referenced interviews and statements she never gave. This is probably partly true, but not for the reason Monika suggests. If things were not reported accurately it was most likely because the media was not going to ever expose the real way Jimi died. Monika tries to convince us it was because she was being stopped from speaking of the real Jimi. However I think we now understand why Monika was staying quiet. What is most obvious is Monika had every means by which to overcome this denial of her story, that is, the manuscript and publishing of her book. The fact she chose not to use the one means at her disposal to get the 'truth' out tells you all you need to know about why she didn't. Monika clearly needed to avoid ever accounting for the details of Jimi's death. The only reason she suddenly published Inner World in 1995 is because Scotland Yard ruled the case would never be re-opened.
And here is where Monika gets to her most obscene denials and weak excuse-making. On page 186 Monika says she has to make parting mention of an event in 1991 that embodied the worst of what oppressed her. In 1991 the British tabloid News Of The World published a headline that said "HENDRIX CASE REOPENED". In it it said two "Ms Marple type fans" had evidence Monika delayed calling the ambulance that morning. This, of course, was the Etchingham petition to Scotland Yard giving evidence of Monika's false story. Mitch Mitchell's wife Dee had worked for BBC and used her contacts to investigate those people who attended Jimi that morning. These people had never been interviewed in the 20 years following Jimi's death. Hendrix girlfriend Kathy Etchingham initiated this investigation because she was in a libel battle with Dannemann over her Hendrix claims.
The gist of the matter is Etchingham found out the ambulance attendants never saw Monika at the flat when they arrived. They said the door was wide-open and no one was to be seen except for Jimi's body laying on the bed. Monika deals with this by making-up a blatant lie, saying one of the attendants first recalled seeing a girl there but then changed his story. Further interviews with the ambulance attendants Saua and Jones confirmed they never saw anyone, but this is also proven in the fact that they proceeded to call the police according to standard procedure. If indeed Monika was there as she claimed the police never would have been summoned. The only reason the police were called was because no one was there to identify the victim. So once again Monika childishly attempts to avoid realities she couldn't possibly hope to escape. The extent of her delusional grasp of reality is shown by the fact she locked this in to print without realizing she was condemning herself by it.
Until I re-read Inner World I had not realized the means by which Monika gained this bold confidence for outright prevarication. As it turns out Etchingham filed a petition with Scotland Yard. Scotland Yard, however, were the same people who didn't do any real investigation in 1970. So the incredibly dubious and opportunist device Monika utilizes to justify her lies is Scotland Yard's own investigation of itself. Monika quotes police superintendent Dennis Care as saying Hendrix's death was too long ago for anyone to remember. However she doesn't share with us the fact what was clearly insisted upon by the attendants, and confirmed by the calling of the constable, has already corroborated this evidence beyond a doubt.
What happened here was like asking the Warren Commission itself to investigate questions over its own evidence and then give a ruling on themselves. Never once does Monika ever address the glaring question over fatal conflict of interest here. She simply quotes Scotland Yard's incredible evasions as confirmation of her position, and proof of the lack of credibility of her critics. Scotland Yard got away with the incredible move of saying the new evidence was nothing new and wasn't anything that the original Inquest hadn't covered. But any simple look at the original Inquest would show it was woefully lacking to the point of criminal incompetence and never even bothered to record basic matters of inquiry like time of death, let alone Monika's easily-proven lies. It's clear from the way Scotland Yard handled this that there was a genuine, serious conflict of interest where Scotland Yard had an agenda that necessitated them preventing their own exposing of themselves. Monika tries to seal this off by saying the article contained information that was proven completely false by Scotland Yard's ruling, however reality dictates that this is not true. Any simple analysis will show that Scotland Yard, once again, like at the original Inquest, simply did not seriously process the evidence.
The critics did not stop however. Monika says they kept up their "Miss Marple" efforts by continuing to ask why she took 5 hours to call the ambulance in articles. Monika expresses consternation over why the public seemed to believe these stories based on inaccurate interpretations of what the ambulance men allegedly said. Eventually, in December 1993 Scotland Yard sent the case back to their international organized crime department under Superintendent Campbell. And this is where Scotland Yard then accessed the unspeakable just like the Warren Commission. In its scandalous defense of not only Monika but itself as well, Scotland Yard then went in and flagrantly lied about the evidence. They said the ambulance men denied saying what was attributed to them and that Jimi was alive when they arrived. This is an outright criminal lie similar to those gotten by the FBI in the Kennedy case. If one goes and looks at the original statements of the ambulance attendants one can see there's no possibility of them being interpreted any other way. They are pretty insistent in what they claimed. Of course Scotland Yard could claim their interviewers were lying, however they would have to then explain why all the corroborating cross-evidence like Burdon's admissions and the doctor's claims all confirm Etchingham's evidence? There's no doubt Scotland Yard is accessing Warren Commission protocol and simply flagrantly lying about the evidence. This is something Monika then exploits to its full advantage and leaves to the end of the book for readers to realize that from which she gained such nerve.
The way Monika then gets around Doctor Bannister's statement that Jimi was dead for many hours before he arrived at hospital is to use the strawman that Hendrix had no rigor mortis. This is, actually, a good argument, however science will probably show that the dampness and heat of the flat as well as Jimi being pickled with the alcohol he was drowned in probably delayed the process. Monika never mentions Bannister's citation of black and deadened tissue lining Jimi's cheeks. In the end Monika's strawman won't get her around the multitude of converging evidence to show Jimi died earlier than her claimed time. What Monika's rigor mortis strawman doesn't answer is why she and all the road crew members would clean the flat while Jimi lay choking? Obviously Jimi was dead, but Monika doesn't have to deal with this because she solves it by simply ignoring it.
Page 189:
" According to the woman's report (Kathy Etchingham's), a pathologist hired by her had discovered, after checking the documents concerning the contents of Jimi's stomach, that he might have died five hours earlier than stated on the death certificate. However, when Scotland Yard had completed the reinvestigation, they explained to me that this pathologist's findings were inaccurate, as he had used an antiquated method and didn't have all the details. Scotland Yard's own pathologist also rechecked the findings of the pathologist who had also carried out the original examination in 1970, and came to the conclusion that Jimi died at the same time as was first stated. Another eminent pathologist in England concluded likewise. "
What Monika Dannemann is straight-facedly referencing here is a bald-faced investigation of Scotland Yard by itself. She never once hesitates to offer Scotland Yard's own official examination of its own doings or acknowledge the egregious conflict of interest involved. What we have here is no different than FBI being allowed to conduct an examination of its own investigation in the Kennedy Assassination. I mean what kind of conclusion did she expect them to come to?
But even worse Scotland Yard just outright lies above. They said Etchingham's pathologist used antiquated methods, but that's rubbish. The matter here is the original discovery by autopsist Doctor Teare of undigested rice grains in Jimi Hendrix's stomach. These were discovered and recorded by Dr Teare at the original autopsy September 21 1970. The problem is the stomach eliminates its contents in about 4-5 hours. Jimi was witnessed eating that rice at Cameron's party at midnight. The fact Teare found undigested rice grains in Jimi's stomach tells you he died right on the bullseye of where the other circumstantial evidence puts Jimi's time of death - somewhere around 4-4:30am. Scotland Yard needs to avoid this so they simply claim Etchingham's pathologist used outdated methods, however they never technically describe exactly how those methods were wrong? Scotland Yard then condemns themselves by claiming the original findings were correct. However the original findings said Jimi died somewhere around 11:45am in the ambulance. Not only do the rice grains make this impossible, but all the other circumstantial evidence of Jimi being dead when Burdon and the road crew members cleaned-up the evidence also destroys this. But the final nail in Scotland Yard's evil heart is Michael Jeffery's confession, still 15 years from being admitted by Tappy Wright. Both Monika and Scotland Yard aid each other in their diabolical deception and share an equal interest in covering-up their mutual involvement in Jimi's death. The truth is the British Government used Monika's story straight and unchallenged to determine their official verdict. Both Scotland Yard and Monika had a shared need to avoid admitting their wrongdoing. All you are seeing here is two liars backing each other's stories.
" Only Dr Bannister kept giving confusing and contradictory statements. In his latest declaration he said: 'I am unable to be precise whether he died in the ambulance or at home.' Another strange statement of his was that Jimi 'had literally drowned himself in red wine'. This was hardly possible, as the pathologist in 1970 had stated clearly that only about 100mg of alcohol, which is very little, had been in Jimi's blood at the time he took the sleeping tablets. "
Here Monika gives the dizzy blonde version of forensics. First off, Bannister witnessed lungs and stomach full of wine in Hendrix that he determined had resulted in drowning as the cause of death and not choking on vomit. Monika deliberately fuzzes the details here in order to get around this fact. She's playing dumb and giving inaccurate information. What she is doing is quoting Bannister being forced to estimate a time of death. Bannister simply covered himself by saying he couldn't determine exactly when Jimi died. But this is dishonestly out of context because Bannister made some other very clear statements that Jimi had been dead for hours before arriving at hospital. Monika knows Jimi was dead when she called Burdon. Besides, Bannister says above "Jimi may have died at home," and that is correct.
Her next logical offense is to misconstrue the blood alcohol content. What she doesn't educate the reader to is the fact the original pathologist used her story to determine his blood alcohol estimates. She doesn't tell us that Dr Teare used her 11:45 time of death to estimate the blood alcohol level at the time of ingesting the sleeping pills. The true 4:30am time of death, never considered by Dr Teare, would completely invalidate his estimates. In fact it would completely destroy Scotland Yard's decision. Since the British system allows Scotland Yard to have the only unchallenged claim on this we simply aren't told about the simple evidence that destroys every single thing both Monika and Scotland Yard says. The correct forensic determination is that Jimi took the pills about 30-45 minutes before dying. Therefore the blood alcohol level when he ingested the pills was whatever it would have been 45 minutes before he died and not the 5 hours determined by Teare. Never once has this basic challenge ever been heard by any official British venue. Their case is destroyed but their answer is they simply aren't interested. It seems we have not only a case of physical murder but legal as well.
On page 189 Monika tells how Jimi's father Al Hendrix hired ex Scotland Yard Superintendent Dennis Care to carry-out his own investigation with Al's authorization. She says Al wanted to put all the speculation and rumors about how Jimi died to rest once and for all. After talking to all the key witnesses Care came to the same conclusion as Scotland Yard. Once again, we have the foxes being asked to investigate the murders in the hen house being offered straight-faced. Nowhere, however, does Monika ever mention that the original inspector who interviewed all those involved in 1970 said publicly that he thought they were all lying. Instead of sparking further investigation, as is the norm with police discovery of witnesses lying, this statement led to just the opposite and, even as Monika states, the Inquest then made no attempt to do any real investigation.
" The tune has changed, but the song remains the same. It had already happened twenty-five years earlier, when an inquest vindicated Jimi both of having taken any hard drugs and of having died of a drug overdose. Yet nobody seemed to care. "
Monika jumps beyond the pale here with a final attempt to summarize this whole thing as media persecution of both her and Jimi. What infuriates me about this is she got the help of some very wicked government liars to achieve this. She is only able to wrap this up so easily because she's relying on government crooks who are flagrantly, criminally obstructing evidence and justice. Monika knows as she says this that Jimi did not die the way she is telling of in this book. She tries to save her soul by using indirect wording to show she isn't necessarily saying Jimi wasn't murdered. If you look at what she writes above it doesn't necessarily exclude murder. In fact Monika has already hinted at it several times already in the book. What Monika doesn't account for in this final summation is how she could claim the re-investigation proved the evidence, and therefore its soundness, while at the same time mentioning several times that the original investigation wasn't sound and missed an unexplained compound that she suggests was poison. Once again Monika offers us something with childish indifference to all the visible conflicts surrounding it. She points at contrived accusations of Bannister offering confusing conflicts while ignoring her own book-load of the same. This book is truly epic in its representation of one of the worst public attempts to get away with gross mistruth and deliberate prevarication concerning a serious event in history. For that reason alone Inner World has significant value as an embodiment of eccentric scandal. Monika condemns herself with this book.
Her last words try to align herself with those lamenting the fact the media won't print the real truth about Jimi Hendrix. Only she does it in a way that forgets to mention the fact she didn't tell the truth about the way Jimi died. I'm right with Monika on this and agree with her 100% - there's just the small matter of Jimi being murdered by waterboarding and Monika not mentioning it. Monika knows this which is why she tries to side step it with the greater issue, which, by the way, also includes the media not telling the true story about Monika's involvement either.
Monika really lets loose with the sugar syrup by saying to resolve this horrible situation we should all lift the veil on Jimi and try to understand his real self and life. When Monika gets to the tough stuff she tends to really let the cotton candy fly. She advises the reader to escape into Jimi's music and lyrics to immerse themselves in the real Jimi and his meaning and this will help alleviate the problems she's pointed-out. The sad thing is this is obviously what Monika did for the 25 years following Jimi's murder. And what is even sadder is it is the exact thing some of Jimi's so-called "fans" are doing when confronted by the murder evidence. They literally say to those trying to expose Jimi's murder that they should just listen to Jimi's music and relax. I can't think of anything stupider.
So while all the things Monika says about seeking the real Jimi in his message are actually true, and actually did originate from Hendrix himself as personally told to Monika, for it to then be used as fodder to cover a very wicked and sinister witnessing to Jimi's murder is an insult to normal definitions of moral understanding and grinds against every call Monika makes to respecting Jimi and his life.
In summation, what we have with Monika's book The Inner World Of Jimi Hendrix is an attempt to use access Monika had to Jimi's inner-most self, as directly explained by Jimi, to bridge-over a very damning scandal and murder. The tragedy of Inner World is that it possesses some of the best information on Jimi's inner philosophical self ever published, however it never manages to escape the horrible fact the witness translating this magical knowledge is the same person who withheld the real truth about how Jimi died. In effect Monika becomes a tragic figure herself who ultimately ends-up a 25 year-delayed victim of Jimi's murder.
I could go much further into the circumstantial, criminal, and medical forensic evidence which condemns Monika's statements, however it is best dealt with in a separate effort and away from a criticism of Monika's book. Once you understand the full evidence for Jimi's murder it only serves to make Monika's effort to defend her story even more preposterous. Sad to say, Monika spent the rest of her life trying to live up to the spiritual dedication Jimi had spoken to her of. She manifested this in the form of some highly artistic paintings of Jimi based on the canvas interpretations Jimi had tasked her with. I can't assume to know how much of Monika's drive was based on real dedication and how much was due to her trying to compensate for her role in concealing Jimi's murder. But one thing is for sure, Monika did manage to capture her attempt to avoid the evidence in Inner World and even ended-up dying because of it. It's a shame Jimi's most private personal beliefs had to arrive in such a scandalous form. In the end, it is the "Inner World" of Monika Dannemann that is the book that has yet to be written, and the book that will reveal the most...
.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
I think psy-ops is busy again. This time they are trying to say the "27 Club" of famous rock stars who died when they were 27 is a sign they signed a contract with the devil. This smells of psy-ops trying to divert attention from their murder of Hendrix:
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/heardmentality...eories.php#
.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
There's been some serious movement on the Hendrix case. As part of Glebbeek's murder denial efforts he has gotten Jeffery office manager Bob Levine to say all the murder theories are nonsense and Tappy Wright admitted he lied about his witnessing in order to sell his book.
My familiarity with the Kennedy case allowed me to see typical evidence denial dirty tactics in Levine's retraction. This is best seen in the recent article linked below. Pay attention to my responses in the comments section of the article and the lack of any other comments challenging them:
http://www.musicradar.com/news/guitars/j...ner-453035
.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
I've had about 5 hours of conversation with a deep Hendrix source in the last 2 days. Probably the best source on the subject. I learned more than I probably want to know and felt sick after the revelations. The waters got much muddier on this than I ever expected.
What is strange is I've discovered one of the doctors at the emergency room where Hendrix was received is telling insider sources in interviews that Jimi was alive when they received him and might have been saved. I then watched a BBC documentary on Hendrix from 2000 where that same doctor looks into the camera and says there was no chance to save Jimi and that he was sure when they received him he was dead. This is one of the most bizarre cases I've ever seen. Every single main witness is on record making crazy-diametrically opposite statements about what they witnessed at the death scene. I found that the JFK investigation has helped me sort-out varying categories of potential disinformation and I've come across some new information that is either earth-changing or deliberate disinfo.
European Hendrix guru Caesar Glebbeek is now taking orders for his UniVibes magazine special edition where he is "Going to debunk the murder nonsense once and for all". I've seen previews and he is taking a radical track with alleged new insider information. I personally think he is naive and doesn't realize he is being fed false information - most likely from government intelligence sources or witnesses seeking to avoid incrimination. What he is doing is skimming all the information that favors his spin from those diametrically-opposing statements and omitting all that which conflicts with it. DiEugenio would have a field day with Caesar.
This is really heating up.
I have work to do because I now need to destroy Caesar's efforts - which shouldn't be too difficult from the preview tidbits I've seen. It's almost childish in its investigative techniques and claims. What Caesar is doing is the Hendrix world equivalent of endorsing the Warren Commission.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
There's some tectonic movement happening in the Hendrix case right now as per my previous post. Mr Glebbeek has gone and gotten statements from some of the main witnesses who are now reversing their previous positions and claiming Hendrix was alive when the ambulance men came and that he arrived at the hospital alive. I can prove that isn't true from both the forensic evidence and previous witness statements - as well as the pattern of lies that is now clear as the attempt to cover-up the truth that they are. These hard reversals are a sure red-flag.
This is really heating up. Thanks to my experience from reading JFK research I'm familiar with lies that appear from government intimidation and damage control. I'm certain that's what we're seeing here, which only indicates, like the Kennedy Assassination, that the authorities are now getting desperate - which means there's something really dangerous they're trying to hide.
I can't share the details right now because we are playing moves where we have to hide our cards, but Mr Glebbeek will force the issue when his material becomes public in September. He's done a bad thing and he's trying to take advantage of these new lies to spin an apology of the official story. We think we've discovered something incredible that cracks the case that, ironically, was used by Mr Glebbeek to try to prove the opposite. He doesn't realize in his effort to disprove the murder he gave us a piece of the puzzle he didn't realize the true interpretation of. We've discovered things that are similar to the (true) witnessings at the Texas theater.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
I just discovered that Philip Harvey, the son of a British Member of Parliament, committed suicide in 1997. I hadn't known that. He did what Monika Dannemann did and hooked-up a hose to his psychedelic 60's van and gassed himself.
This is very interesting because Harvey was a critical witness to an untold story the night Jimi died. He didn't come out with his tale until his MP father died in order to avoid scandal. Harvey told Hendrix researchers that Jimi and Monika had come for tea to his Notting Hill townhouse where he was living with two young women. Apparently this was scandalous so Harvey kept his account to himself for decades. Harvey described an hysterical outburst by Monika when Jimi paid too much attention to one of the pretty young ladies.
The reason this is interesting is because the Hendrix case had come to a state of contention when authors David Henderson and Tony Brown printed Harvey's story in their books right around 1997. What caused Harvey to take the same route out of life Monika did is something that deserves investigation at the very least. As it turns out Caesar Glebbeek alleges he has found new witnesses who challenge Harvey's story and say they saw Jimi and Monika leave 3 hours earlier than Harvey's sworn affidavit of 10:40pm. If this disagreement in the witnessing had anything to do with Harvey's death it is something we need to find out. At the very least Glebbeek's new claims will spur an intense look into the new evidence and what it tells. The timing of Harvey's death with the revelation of his witnessing in those books is something that needs looking into.
Curious that Monika covered-up the visit to Harvey's in her official accounts to the British Inquest. Was it because of Harvey's noble blood or was it because Monika's hysterical outbursts potentially exposed her involvement in Jimi's death? Curious both Harvey and Monika gassed themselves in their cars when the evidence was finally coming out.
Another curious matter associated with this tea at Harvey's:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music...ction.html
.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
The second assassination of Jimi Hendrix is currently underway. I suggest those interested in a prime case of dirty deep politics read the link I'll provide to see a very dirty disinformation campaign has commenced in order to muddy the waters and confuse the evidence behind Jimi Hendrix's murder.
Hendrix archivist and magazine publisher Caesar Glebbeek has done a very dastardly thing and released a publication of his UniVibes Magazine with a new 'investigation' designed to "debunk the murder nonsense". The publication is a farce as are Caesar's laughable investigation methods. You'll see the bare face of the Unspeakable standing right out in daylight at this very moment. This is literally a crime (the best stuff is in the last pages). Caesar is now the Vince Bugliosi of the Hendrix world:
http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread....ndrix-quot
.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
16-09-2011, 06:44 PM
(This post was last modified: 17-09-2011, 06:08 PM by Albert Doyle.)
I'd like show a good example of the current murder that is occurring in this matter. The only Hendrix website on the internet is called "Crosstown Torrents". The moderator is a brit with a clear national bias against murder evidence for Jimi Hendrix. Here is what he wrote in the thread discussing Caesar Glebbeek's bogus attempt to disprove the murder:
Quote:Until We Meet Again. Caesar Glebbeek 2011
OK, I have to admit I have yet to read the entire publication and that when I do it'll take some time to digest and more importantly cross reference some details.
So here are a few thoughts from reading "end results".
Is it worth the cost? No, well at least not for me cause it simply confirms what I already "know", reaches the same conclusion(s) I had formed over the intervening years since James Marshal Hendrix died. Died, as in "NOT MURDERED".
It appears that we could have had more detail in the publication, as in facsimile of certain documents. That is a major downside to this publication.
Some statements would have been better supported. As an example, C.G states that no insurance payment was made to MJ in his life time. This sort of statement requires clear support. When we have unsupported statements we result in the "you can't believe everything you see and hear, can you" scenario.
Given the EVIDENCE we have / they had at the time, then the coroner could have only have arrived at one of two outcomes, accidental death or open verdict. We are aware of the one attained.
Now, I do feel we will continue to have different OPINIONS here of the publication and of Jimi's death. But if you have no firm EVIDENCE to offer I see no reason to continue the debate, attempting to force any individual opinion on others is futile, no matter who loud you shout.
Finally, do you need to read this publication, is it essential reading? Well yes on both counts. Even when I'm critical of lack of supported statements, I have to say that at least Caesar has worked hard and in an objective manner, to produce this publication, a lot more than any of the rest of us has done.
Looking forward to hear what the rest of you think of the publication and how you feel of the "end result", but as a continued debate of if's, but's and maybe's along with blame and who should have done what, when and where I do feel this issue has run its race.
Just a final comment. If anyone here feels the need to question the contents of the publication then please do but not on the basis that you believe other publication you have read. That is both unfair and unsound of reasoning.
My Reply (that will soon be deleted by that same moderator):
I have to say up front that moderation that seeks to preclude discussion as a sort of decreed edict is contrary to all known forms of free speech. The imposition of completely unnecessary subject control stands out and grinds against the obvious. I say that persons who haven't answered any of the criticisms to show there's serious argued reasons to see the murder evidence has not been overturned by Caesar's input, who then admit they haven't read or answered any of the factual arguments, who then turn around and call for a pre-emptive shutdown of the thread, are persons who are not sincerely addressing the real facts of this matter or open discussion of it. I think it is kind of obvious that these people guard their opinions with forced shutdown of the topic and cite site rules violations that don't exist and aren't being violated. It makes no sense to me to have a Conspiracy Theory branch that is so strictly guarded, not for site rules reasons, but political ones being posed as violation. To force a decision that one side has been satisfied before even giving the other side a chance to speak is rogue censorship. The goal here is clearly not being able to address all the facts of this case but to reach the conclusion of some people with the intention of shutting down the topic as soon as possible where no real need to do that actually exists. There's no doubt whatsoever that an opinion is being forced here under the guise of site authority. That goes for the general Hendrix Community as well. This is evidenced by the fact that some very real and genuine counter arguments already presented in this thread could not be answered by those claiming to prove the non-murder position. Discussing the facts of this case and the flaws in people's arguments is not a violation or any wrongdoing that needs to be controlled. That's silly and grinds against the most commonly-accepted forms of free speech and normal internet discussion. Some try to force this into the right of opinion, but all known forms of civilized conduct recognize that facts and reason come before right to opinion. Anyone can see that a certain camp is avoiding facts and provable arguments they don't prefer. To call this 'right to opinion' is not honest in my OPINION. But, more importantly, in reality's opinion. It's all too predictable that those who don't believe in the murder would see right away that Caesar's publication trying to disprove the murder has failed to do so badly. And if you look at the level of scrutiny these people normally impose on the evidence around Jimi's death they hold back and don't apply it to Caesar's mess here. That to me is not honest which means the overall opinion about the subject itself is not based on honest reasoning. It's all too predictable that an early call for shutting down of the topic would come from this camp and citing site rules as a reason is totally dishonest in my opinion. It's all too clear that these people know they've suffered a bad set-back as far as their position and are seeking to avoid that by shutting down the thread before the discussion has even started.
Quote:Just a final comment. If anyone here feels the need to question the contents of the publication then please do but not on the basis that you believe other publication you have read. That is both unfair and unsound of reasoning.
Again, this is incredible and most people would see this kind of intrusion into basic free speech to make a rational argument as ridiculous. It is only tolerated because of the overt bias of those who want to hamstring those with good arguments and evidence for the murder. To say it is "unsound reasoning" is preposterous. Actually using all the references you can to prove something is accepted as good and sound research and reasoning out in the normal world. I would think Hendrix fans would want people to find-out exactly what happened to Jimi and fight for justice for him using all possible resources. Again, I think some people are convincing themselves their unfair restriction of normal free speech is somehow justified, or serves a good purpose, when it is really just them making-up excuses to not hear what they don't want to hear. That's ridiculous and it should never happen on a Jimi Hendrix website. If you look at the content of what has been written here no great violations have occurred that merit this kind of invasive overcontrol of normal discussion. It think deletions and punishments have occurred under false pretenses that were not deserved. The continuation of this subject is no offense and doesn't violate any site rules. I don't think the restrictors detect that it's rather preposterous to have a Conspiracy Theory branch where ever time you try to discuss the murder evidence it gets quickly shut down at first excuse. It can honestly be said that this is being used to prevent the murder evidence from being made obvious. I think it is very clear that this is being justified by an ambiguous, arbitrary claim that everyone has a right to their opinion. But that can only be true if those who present the murder evidence are also allowed their opinion. In my mind this right to opinion is being used to shut down better arguments for the murder. It's being used as an excuse. The outcome is that people who can present good arguments for the murder are not being allowed their right and opinion to fully prove the case. In the normal world toleration of difficult discussion in order to establish facts trumps those who dislike it and the decision usually errs in favor of airing facts and arguing truths. It's the whole basis of free speech. To serve exclusion of factual argument in favor of non-specific reasons that can only limit the information needed to understand this matter, before allowing the actual subject matter to be discussed, is really a violation of all accepted forms of civilized conduct and should be what is precluded here. It's clear to me the other side realizes it's done badly by this publication and needs to get-out quickly. That's intellectual and moral cowardice in my opinion, and is just as dishonest as it is unfair. In the end this all comes at the expense of Jimi Hendrix, which is, really, it's worst offense. The moderator is not the site's dictator, and never should be. Especially one with such an obvious bias on the subject, which is, in itself, a violation of most understood moderator neutrality ethics.
Jimi was murdered, I assure you. For some reason most Hendrix fans don't want to hear that - or, more importantly, the evidence that proves it. Shame.
|
