10-10-2011, 05:17 PM
Page 47:
If you want to understand what Caesar really thinks read page 47. On page 47 he provides a pretty good array of quotes from various witnesses to Jimi's trying to fire Jeffery. Noel Redding makes it pretty clear they had a meeting in February 1969 between himself, Jimi, Mitch, Jeffery, and Chas agreeing to fire Jeffery. People should read Noel's account closely because it pretty much shows how 1) The band was trying to sever Jeffery ever since winter 1969, and 2) No matter what they did Jeffery would always turn-up in full control. I find it interesting Noel questioned Chas' conspicuous quiet on Jeffery's unaffectable permanency. Noel keenly describes Chas' position as "uninvolved involvement". Whatever the case, Noel is making clear that the band was being dominated and controlled by Jeffery no matter what they did. Keep in mind Jimi realized his wishes were not being respected so he broke-up the band in June that year. Chas remained conspicuously quiet about things he should have spoken about in the years after. Except there was one highly interesting moment where Chas did let out a hint. On a British talk show in 1989 Chas made the comment "If anyone speaks of the real way Jimi died they'll have their head blown-off." I think we know why Chas stayed quiet all those years.
Next Caesar shows the Byzantine conflicts built in to Jimi's management and legal representation. He quotes Steingarten himself as saying he disagreed with many of Jeffery's actions towards Jimi but was legally-bound because he was also Jeffery's lawyer. Jeffery, of course, did not set-up that arrangement accidentally. On December 4th 1970 Steingarten resigned because of this conflict, but bear in mind that this was a good time for Steingarten to abandon ship as well. This page puzzles me because Caesar offers it as a page-filling neutral survey. It's good for understanding what Jimi's managers thought but it doesn't make any effort to apply correct context or any processing of the evidence towards murder. The reason I say this page shows what Caesar really thinks is because the only reason he shows us this stuff is because he knows Jimi's management problems led to his death. It's obvious the reason Caesar lays off any interpretation of what he shows is because he knows it points towards murder. Otherwise he wouldn't have mentioned it. A keener eye would see the pattern in the quotes themselves. There's a clear division between accusatory quotes from the victims like Jimi, Mitch and Noel, and exculpatory excuse-making from all of the offenders. If you look at the quotes Caesar has gathered there's a clear dichotomy between how Jeffery's office members saw Jeffery's relationship with Jimi and how his clients viewed him. I think it's more than obvious that these overly-clean and favorable descriptions coming from office-insiders are trying to hide something. It's fairly obvious that office-insiders like Goldstein, Weiss, and Levine, who all had an interest in Jimi through Jeffery, all came up with overly-sanitized versions of Jeffery. Ultimately, what stands-out the most is that all of these comments fail to reflect the most important thing, that is, that Jeffery was seriously ripping Jimi off and was involved in some very shady business through those Bahamian banks, and also, Jimi was most-likely murdered by Jeffery because of it. Anyone who understands what happened to Jimi would see the incriminating pattern within the statements themselves that gives it away. In light of this, Caesar has good reason to show these quotes without comment. Once again, Caesar shows us pure evidence of murder while having the nerve to suggest the opposite.
I guess what Caesar is doing here is allowing the reader to pick which viewpoint they like just as Caesar has done in 'Until We Meet Again'. By laying out how some people say there were no problems between Jeffery and Jimi he is allowing this to stand and letting people choose which version they prefer. It also has the effect of showing how people had totally opposite opinions about the same event. This works for Caesar because he uses it to show that Jimi was surrounded by accounts of his life that varied just as much as the accounts of his death. But Caesar is just showing the byproduct of Jeffery's relationship with Jimi through quotes, nowhere does he make any honest effort to translate what is being shown here or truthfully show the bias of the people being quoted. Clearly the people on the inside didn't want to admit they were part of an operation that robbed and then murdered Jimi Hendrix. It's not surprising these people ignored the real problems between Jeffery and Jimi and painted a rosy picture. Just like it's not surprising Caesar ignores what it really says as well. If he wanted to, Caesar could provide numerous accounts of people speaking of Jeffery's worst intrigues. Jeffery was stealing from Jimi and under-reporting proceeds by as much as 80%. He also used mafia thugs to intimidate Jimi with gunfire at his home in the Catskills. In fall 1969 Jeffery set-up a fake kidnapping where he told Jimi that certain people were depending on him being his manager and if he ever attempted to fire him he would be killed. There's real question over Jeffery's relationship with those powerful people through those Bahamian banks and how Jimi and his money worked in to that. Nightclub manager and friend of Hendrix Bobby Woods was murdered after spending a day alone with Jimi on his boat. I wonder what they were afraid Woods would tell Jimi? Devon Wilson could have told you about Jeffery, except she died a strange unexplained death 5 months after Hendrix. There's a much more dangerous and dirtier picture Caesar could show you about Jeffery but he chooses harmless quotes to keep you uninformed. To inform you of the truth about Jeffery's murderously dangerous relationship to Jimi would only expose you to the evidence behind the real way Jimi died.
If you want to understand what Caesar really thinks read page 47. On page 47 he provides a pretty good array of quotes from various witnesses to Jimi's trying to fire Jeffery. Noel Redding makes it pretty clear they had a meeting in February 1969 between himself, Jimi, Mitch, Jeffery, and Chas agreeing to fire Jeffery. People should read Noel's account closely because it pretty much shows how 1) The band was trying to sever Jeffery ever since winter 1969, and 2) No matter what they did Jeffery would always turn-up in full control. I find it interesting Noel questioned Chas' conspicuous quiet on Jeffery's unaffectable permanency. Noel keenly describes Chas' position as "uninvolved involvement". Whatever the case, Noel is making clear that the band was being dominated and controlled by Jeffery no matter what they did. Keep in mind Jimi realized his wishes were not being respected so he broke-up the band in June that year. Chas remained conspicuously quiet about things he should have spoken about in the years after. Except there was one highly interesting moment where Chas did let out a hint. On a British talk show in 1989 Chas made the comment "If anyone speaks of the real way Jimi died they'll have their head blown-off." I think we know why Chas stayed quiet all those years.
Next Caesar shows the Byzantine conflicts built in to Jimi's management and legal representation. He quotes Steingarten himself as saying he disagreed with many of Jeffery's actions towards Jimi but was legally-bound because he was also Jeffery's lawyer. Jeffery, of course, did not set-up that arrangement accidentally. On December 4th 1970 Steingarten resigned because of this conflict, but bear in mind that this was a good time for Steingarten to abandon ship as well. This page puzzles me because Caesar offers it as a page-filling neutral survey. It's good for understanding what Jimi's managers thought but it doesn't make any effort to apply correct context or any processing of the evidence towards murder. The reason I say this page shows what Caesar really thinks is because the only reason he shows us this stuff is because he knows Jimi's management problems led to his death. It's obvious the reason Caesar lays off any interpretation of what he shows is because he knows it points towards murder. Otherwise he wouldn't have mentioned it. A keener eye would see the pattern in the quotes themselves. There's a clear division between accusatory quotes from the victims like Jimi, Mitch and Noel, and exculpatory excuse-making from all of the offenders. If you look at the quotes Caesar has gathered there's a clear dichotomy between how Jeffery's office members saw Jeffery's relationship with Jimi and how his clients viewed him. I think it's more than obvious that these overly-clean and favorable descriptions coming from office-insiders are trying to hide something. It's fairly obvious that office-insiders like Goldstein, Weiss, and Levine, who all had an interest in Jimi through Jeffery, all came up with overly-sanitized versions of Jeffery. Ultimately, what stands-out the most is that all of these comments fail to reflect the most important thing, that is, that Jeffery was seriously ripping Jimi off and was involved in some very shady business through those Bahamian banks, and also, Jimi was most-likely murdered by Jeffery because of it. Anyone who understands what happened to Jimi would see the incriminating pattern within the statements themselves that gives it away. In light of this, Caesar has good reason to show these quotes without comment. Once again, Caesar shows us pure evidence of murder while having the nerve to suggest the opposite.
I guess what Caesar is doing here is allowing the reader to pick which viewpoint they like just as Caesar has done in 'Until We Meet Again'. By laying out how some people say there were no problems between Jeffery and Jimi he is allowing this to stand and letting people choose which version they prefer. It also has the effect of showing how people had totally opposite opinions about the same event. This works for Caesar because he uses it to show that Jimi was surrounded by accounts of his life that varied just as much as the accounts of his death. But Caesar is just showing the byproduct of Jeffery's relationship with Jimi through quotes, nowhere does he make any honest effort to translate what is being shown here or truthfully show the bias of the people being quoted. Clearly the people on the inside didn't want to admit they were part of an operation that robbed and then murdered Jimi Hendrix. It's not surprising these people ignored the real problems between Jeffery and Jimi and painted a rosy picture. Just like it's not surprising Caesar ignores what it really says as well. If he wanted to, Caesar could provide numerous accounts of people speaking of Jeffery's worst intrigues. Jeffery was stealing from Jimi and under-reporting proceeds by as much as 80%. He also used mafia thugs to intimidate Jimi with gunfire at his home in the Catskills. In fall 1969 Jeffery set-up a fake kidnapping where he told Jimi that certain people were depending on him being his manager and if he ever attempted to fire him he would be killed. There's real question over Jeffery's relationship with those powerful people through those Bahamian banks and how Jimi and his money worked in to that. Nightclub manager and friend of Hendrix Bobby Woods was murdered after spending a day alone with Jimi on his boat. I wonder what they were afraid Woods would tell Jimi? Devon Wilson could have told you about Jeffery, except she died a strange unexplained death 5 months after Hendrix. There's a much more dangerous and dirtier picture Caesar could show you about Jeffery but he chooses harmless quotes to keep you uninformed. To inform you of the truth about Jeffery's murderously dangerous relationship to Jimi would only expose you to the evidence behind the real way Jimi died.