Jimi Hendrix Murder - 40 years ago - The 'Experience'!

[Albert Doyle]

Page 39:


Caesar opens by discussing medical irrelevancies from the autopsy description of Jimi's heart. This is just page-filler that makes it seem like Caesar is approaching this from a sophisticated medical investigation perspective when actually he's just filling space to avoid addressing the incriminating medical proof.

Caesar dances around the "free fluid" found at the autopsy with a quick claim it was vomit and then gets out quickly. Not so fast Caesar. If you read what Dr Teare actually said closely he said there was vomited material found in the bronchi. The fact he distinguishes between this material and the 400ml of "free fluid" means the fluid was something other than vomit. Let's get right down to it, if Dr Bannister claims to have suctioned "bottles worth" of wine from Hendrix's lungs and stomach then it stands to reason the 400ml of fluid found in the left lung at the autopsy by Dr Teare was most likely wine. Caesar gets out of this area fast because he knows the deeper he looks in to it the more obvious it becomes. While claiming the autopsy found no evidence of wine, there you have it right there - along with evidence of Caesar trying to avoid it. This was most likely wine that continued to siphon from the stomach into the lung after Jimi was declared dead. Caesar claims this forensic discovery, along with the collapsed lung, was a product of inhalation of vomit. He never honestly admits that this would also perfectly conform to being drowned in wine. It's obvious the "free fluid" was vomit-free wine.

As for the stomach contents, here's where Caesar really gets hustling. The problem Caesar has here is that Dr Teare found undigested whole rice grains in Jimi's stomach. Since, as Caesar points-out in his own words, "it takes the stomach 2-4 hours to clear its contents" this is a strong forensic indicator of when Jimi died. In fact, Dr Crompton used it to determine Jimi died no later than 5:30am (which is correct). Caesar's gross stupidity here is not realizing he has defeated his own argument by its own internal logic. He claims the barbiturates slowed down the digestion process but then proceeds to explain that Jimi didn't ingest the barbiturates for 5 hours after eating the rice, and since he himself writes "it takes 2-4 hours for the stomach to clear its contents" he therefore has defeated his own excuse for the rice being there and established a 5 hour barbiturate-free period of digestion. Caesar is a fool who is obviously over his head in this kind of matter. His arguments are very effective proof of murder in and of themselves. He thinks his forced recital of medical generalities relieves him of credibly answering the operative forensic points.

Whether Jimi Hendrix had a fatal barbiturate blood level is secondary to whether he was deliberately overdosed in an act of murder. The blood level Caesar cites as proof Jimi would have died from an overdose does not preclude evidence of murder. This goes for the 3.9mg found in the liver as well. Jimi may very well have had a 4x lethal dose in his liver, however that in itself doesn't preclude murder. In fact it could be evidence that his murderers needed to assure he was unconscious when they did their deed.

Caesar now commits the ultimate irony by criticizing Dr Teare's errors and omissions in the autopsy report. He complains Dr Teare failed to list the content of the entire intestinal tract. In an epic act of outrageous, backwards hypocrisy Caesar chides Dr Teare for not stating the exact nature of the "free fluid" discovered in the left lung (Caesar gives himself away. Trust me, he is very happy Dr Teare didn't identify it as putrid wine).

Caesar then proceeds to employ dishonest obfuscation tactics by claiming Dr Teare incorrectly cited the normal Vesparax dose as being 1/2 tablet. He says it should have been listed as 1/2 to 1 tablet. This is minor hair-splitting and doesn't answer the fact that Vesparax were know to be double strength. Caesar continues by explaining the best organs in which to detect barbiturate levels. He claims Dr Teare should have taken muscle samples because they are the best indicator. This is informative, but doesn't really answer what we already know as far as forensic evidence for murder.


Page 40:


Here Caesar gets into valid high science analysis of the correct tests Dr Teare should have made. He cites a "thin-layer chromatography" process that should have been done on Jimi's brain that would have narrowed-down a more precise time of barbiturate ingestion. In fact, it is these very high forensic calculations that were never done on Jimi. It is our case that there is enough additional existing forensic data to make those calculations. Caesar does something useful here because he points in the direction of the necessary forensic processes that need to be done (and still can). He fails to realize that since he has failed to defeat Dr Crompton's claim of the whole rice grains indicating a 5:30am time of death that therefore the very forensic science he speaks of proves that Jimi didn't die the way he claims.

Caesar once again brings up the alcohol data found at the autopsy. We've already discussed this, however he once again fails to realize Dr Teare's extrapolated estimate of 100mg blood alcohol upon time of ingestion is based on Monika's false timeline that allows an extra 6 hours that didn't exist. It is our case that once you gauge the real timeline that these estimates are all invalid and should be thrown-out. What Dr Teare's assumed timeline and estimates do is allow an alcohol level that would explain the understandable reaction with the barbiturate and therefore choking on vomit. However, once you input the real times involved, the 5mg/100ml blood alcohol level discovered at the autopsy automatically grossly conflicts with both the assumed pathology and wine flooding the lungs. Caesar addresses none of this because he operates under the assumption that it doesn't exist. What is obvious here is that the lungs and stomach full of wine Dr Bannister witnessed, in comparison to the minimal blood alcohol content, is automatic forensic evidence of murder. Both Caesar and the British authorities get around this by not officially recognizing Dr Bannister's wine in their observations.

Caesar completes his backwards attempt by confirming Jimi drank the white wine spoken of by Monika too long before it could be claimed to have caused a reaction with the barbiturates. He says Jimi drank the wine from between 11pm and 1am and that he took the sleeping pills 6 hours later at around 7:30am. He then goes on to say the only thing Jimi drank after getting back to the Samarkand was Coca Cola. Well, if we look at all the witnesses' claims there was an awful lot of fluid involved here. So whether that witnessed fluid could be claimed to be Coca Cola is highly doubtable. But Dr Bannister was fairly clear that Jimi had been drenched in red wine, including his hair. And don't forget Monika admitted to Sharon Lawrence that she "washed 'sick' off Jimi's face with wine".

Caesar's thorough analysis of Jimi's wine consumption is probably fairly accurate. So what I don't understand is why he refuses to realize he has very capably prepared the ground for us to show that there's no reasonable explanation for the wine Dr Bannister witnessed outside of murder. Caesar deals with this by fastidiously attempting to deny the wine witnessed by Dr Bannister, however the more he does that the more he establishes a donut hole around the wine he can't so easily explain away. In the end, all Caesar has done here is made it more apparent that the masses of wine Dr Bannister witnessed can't be resolved with the correctly-related forensic evidence.

On page 40 Caesar includes a helpful manufacturer's product information box for Vesparax. It lists all the product ingredients and their actions and behaviors. Also included is how the drug acts in situations of overdose and what its affects are. A list of treatments to save an overdose victim is described. Interesting is the indication that peak plasma levels are reached after 1-2 hours. My only comment on this is that the manufacturer claims the lethal dose threshold is reached at "9-10 tablets" - which makes me ask how Dr Teare could claim Jimi had 4 times the lethal dose in his liver when it is generally understood he could have taken no more than 9 pills?


Page 41:


Here Caesar once again dances and equivocates over Dr Teare's estimate that Jimi took what he described as "nearly" a fatal dose. While trying to minimize Vesparax's strength by quibbling over the dose being 1/2 to 1 tablet, Caesar then maximizes its effect by claiming Jimi took well over a fatal dose. But if we go to the manufacturer's product information Caesar just provided we see they themselves list the lethal dose threshold as being "9-10 tablets", confirming Dr Teare's estimate.

From there Caesar discusses a lengthy product history for Vesparax. He describes how its powerful Secobarbital ingredient caused it to be classified as a narcotic in 1993. The next year in 1994 it was withdrawn from the market. The word was it was killing too many people. Caesar concludes it was a "very powerful" drug that constituted a serious public health risk.

Caesar commits yet another one of his Rube Goldberg investigation fumbles when examining the Vesparax. He claims many people were under the effects of drugs when they took them forgetting they took the original dose and then taking a second dose on top of it. He claims this explains many of the overdoses and indirectly suggests Jimi may have done the same. However he stupidly then goes and explains that the Vesparax came in blister packs of ten where you had to take each and every tablet out separately. Well, by Caesar's own description, this makes it very unlikely Jimi would have mistaken the count because he had the empty blisters right there in front of him. Once again, Caesar fatuously disproves his own suggestion without registering it.

Next, Caesar relates the anecdote of a black London ambulance driver who overheard the conversation of a person who worked with the ambulance attendants from that morning. That person said they heard the attendants admit they thought Jimi was just another "black drunk" whom they left laying on his back in the ambulance. The inference of this is that Jimi died from mistreatment and was allowed to choke to death in the ambulance. This is irrelevant, however, because we already know from the attendants' original statement that Jimi was already dead at the Samarkand.

In yet another example of ultimate irony Caesar goes on to describe the efforts of police superintendent Dennis Care to investigate the circumstances around Jimi's death in 1992-93 after Kathy Etchingham had raised her petition. This, of course, is allowing the foxes to investigate what happened in the henhouse, but, hey, why bother to point that out when you have a mutual interest in criminal deception? Unfortunately, Jimi's father, Al Hendrix, was too trusting and naive to see what a mistake it was to hire Scotland Yard to investigate themselves. Caesar has no qualms with this rogue conflict of interest, he simply annotates that Care refused to allow him to publish his findings without compensation. Nowhere will the reader ever know that Care concluded there was nothing wrong with the original investigation (surprise, surprise) and that no new evidence was found. Care, like Caesar, concluded Monika's notorious story to the Inquest was valid.

[Albert Doyle]

Page 42


In the ultimate insult to Jimi Hendrix Caesar allows Dennis Care to say Jimi was still alive when the ambulance men arrived and that his death was a tragic accident. Nowhere, of course, will either Care or Glebbeek bother to analyze the lies told by all the witnesses at the Samarkand or how they affect the determination. Care, as a police representative, has the outrageous criminal nerve to not explain what Jimi's health status was during the unmentionable 5 hour clean-up. You can see how dirty a case this is from this alone and why authorities like Care would need to lie so badly.

In yet another classic Orwellian presentation of backwards evidence Caesar chides the Inquest for not requesting any statements from the whole list of main witnesses. He sums this up by saying the British Inquest was biased and wanted to wrap-up Hendrix's death as a drug overdose as quickly as possible for political reasons. Caesar is probably at least partly correct here, however he makes his conclusion in the context that an accidental death failed to be proven because of this. Well, there's reason to show that might not be the only motivation. After all, Jimi's problems with Michael Jeffery were not unknown and any basic inquiry into such a death would at least include some investigation of possible foul play. There's a whole list of reasons why the British Government could have laid back on a real investigation. Michael Jeffery's being a member of MI-6 being one of them. Caesar plays the role of innocent lamb when it comes to government intrigue. Certainly there's nothing in there to preclude the cover-up of a murder.

But we can really go much deeper than this if we enlist Alex Constantine's research into the US Government's COINTELPRO program and Jimi Hendrix's membership on their target list as established through the FBI's files. If you involve the true history of what happened to people targeted by that program you'll find both Jimi Hendrix's death and the non-investigation that followed to be very understandable. But since Caesar focuses only on proving an accidental death he relieves himself of all this by simply not mentioning it. Never will we learn that spreading a false reason for death was spelled-out in the FBI's own self-description of that program. Because of Caesar's exclusionary methodology no one will ever know that intel used the media to carry this out and help defame their victims. It's hard to sort-out what was tabloid abuse and what was deliberate disinformation, however it never dawns on Caesar that Jimi was such a powerful target that those programs still continue to defame him even today and suppress the investigations he wonders about. If Caesar was credible he would ask why the real facts behind Jimi's death haven't been re-investigated even now? After all, he himself has provided enough evidence to do so - even if in a backwards way. It's obvious that Caesar fails to realize that once he himself establishes Jimi's Inquest was politically corrupted that it isn't that far from there to political assassination.


Page 43:


On this page Caesar discusses the infamous libel case between Kathy Etchingham and Monika Dannemann that sparked the re-investigation of the circumstances around Jimi's death. Caesar opens with a poisonous round. He quotes Monika speaking of a letter from Dee Mitchell informing her that she had discovered Kathy had fabricated her evidence and Dee had removed herself from participation and was writing Monika in apology. Caesar even provides a link showing these letters from Dee. To understand the serious offense Caesar commits here you have to go to pages 197-204 of Kathy Etchingham's book 'Through Gypsy Eyes'. Once you read those pages you'll understand that no serious or credible source could ever use Dee Mitchell or her words directly. What Kathy describes is so bad that the reader should be seriously offended that Caesar tried to deceive them so badly. Caesar obviously holds his readers in contempt and isn't afraid to withhold true or honest context that seriously affects what he is trying to show. To quote Dee Mitchell directly without sharing the seriously-qualifying context behind her letters is a fatal violation on many levels that automatically places Caesar as the dishonest presenter that he is. The truth is Dee was spreading crazy poison about Kathy at the time and the letter was written in pure revenge, knowingly lying in order to produce the intended affect Caesar then opportunistically seizes upon. No honest person would ever dare present Dee Mitchell's claims directly in any honest investigation and in doing so Caesar permanently destroys both his credibility and case. Go ahead, check it out, you'll find Caesar has a bizarre penchant for defending notoriously-lying women involved in serious scandals. Nowhere will Caesar ever explore that Dee Mitchell is acting exactly like an infiltrator deliberately sabotaging the case.

To further his misleading offenses Caesar then cites internet posts suggesting once Monika published her book pro-Kathy forces made death threats against her. The suggestion here is that Monika's book was so truthful that Kathy needed to make threats to keep it from coming out. This is crazy in its brazen deceit. The truth is Monika was probably being threatened by the people who murdered Jimi because they were afraid she would talk. Once again Caesar looks through the telescope backwards and turns the evidence on its head in order to suggest the opposite of what it really shows.

There's two problems with Caesar's coverage of Tony Brown's taped phone calls with Monika Dannemann. First, Caesar highlights that these were "illegally recorded". Maybe they were, however that isn't what's important. What's important is Brown made a record of Monika telling many different versions of the same story. That's a pure sign that Monika was lying (as she was). Secondly, Caesar attributes these tapes as being to blame for Etchingham's libel suit against Monika. That isn't entirely true because Monika was calling Kathy a liar in writing in many publications. As usual, Caesar accents and overemphasizes the trivial in order to get around the real points. Those points were: why was Monika lying, and what was it being used to cover-up? Tony Brown is owed a huge debt because his book 'The Final Days Of Jimi Hendrix' broke open the evidence that Monika was lying, and that the official explanation for Jimi's death was highly questionable. Caesar commits yet another epitome of travesty by lamenting that Monika's death will now keep the truth from coming out. Orwell in full-bloom.

Caesar quotes Monika as saying Kathy was trying to reinvent Jimi's death and that the process was "bringing out a lot of pain again". I guess I'd agree, but only in the sense that Copernicus was "reinventing" the solar system and that the persecutions over this were causing pain.

Poor Alan Douglas is quoted making an offhand 1993 remark saying these theories have been around for years and that Kathy should let it rest. Douglas then chimes that it doesn't make any difference how many minutes delay there was in calling the ambulance. This statement makes me wonder about Douglas. In any case, it is a prime example of Caesar only skimming quotes that work in his favor. There's many more quotes Caesar could use that he doesn't.

Whether Kathy Etchingham demanded Monika be jailed is neither here nor there. Caesar quotes Kathy as saying she never asked for Monika to be jailed and then displays a court writ showing exactly that. Caesar uses this as a device to show that Kathy was not accurate in her statements and was vindictively persecuting Monika. I don't know if punishment orders were done by the court and not by Kathy. In any case, this example is being used to paint Monika as a persecuted victim. Anyone who has studied her lies, and defiant defense of them, would know that could never be seriously promoted whatever Kathy did to her. Caesar's quoting of Monika's mother in defense of her is just more show tactics. Never does Caesar stop to think that the British Government would profit by piling charges and fines on Monika to create a scapegoat and encumber a dangerous witness.

This build-up then leads to a column labeled 'Monika Dannemann Witchhunt'. Caesar tries to embellish this portrayal by castigating Hendrix figure Michael Fairchild as having gloated over Monika's death. Fairchild had helped Kathy Etchingham investigate the evidence. In this flagrant attempt to portray Monika as an innocent victim of vicious enemies Caesar claims that "self-appointed amateur sleuths" were quibbling over Monika's stories varying by a few minutes between different accounts. This is an outrageous falsifying of fact being committed by Caesar. Anyone with a good handle on Monika and her claims would know the times involved varied significantly in her accounts to several different legal authorities. Monika's wake-up time varied between accounts from 11am to 10am, and, finally, 9am. Caesar knows the serious implications of this so he dares try to get around it by schmoozing the reader that it was only "2 or 3 minutes" between accounts. Caesar is a criminal liar because he should know these changes in story happened, and were recorded, at the time and not 25 years later as he falsely claims. In this publication Caesar has destroyed his credibility in several places and this is one of them.

In a desperate attempt to shift blame from Monika for inexcusably varying accounts Caesar gives the example of Mitch Mitchell claiming he swapped a drum kit for Jimi's famous white stratocaster. Caesar opines that the Hendrix community doesn't demand the same level of accuracy from Mitch that it did Monika, and that Monika was the victim of a double standard. This should be obvious for what it is. The simple answer is it is irrelevant, and not only has Caesar badly failed to account for Monika's lies, but they still need to be answered. Caesar, once again, exposes himself by this.


Page 44:


Caesar makes another transparently patronizing excuse by informing the reader he has inserted well over 200 "[sic]" correction notes when covering the years from 1966 to 1970 in his UniVibes Magazine. Caesar instructs us that time plays tricks with the memory over the years. Of course this has nothing to do with the controversy over Monika Dannemann and what happened at the Samarkand Hotel on the morning of September 18th 1970. Caesar must think his readers are either newcomers or stupid. Anyone who has done even the most basic research on this can see that the main controversy surrounding Monika originated from, and was locked in to, records taken at the time. The passage of years has nothing to do with Monika changing her wake-up times by hours back in September 1970. It has nothing to do with Monika's lies, at the time, about what the ambulance men said and did. It has nothing to do with Terry Slater and others making admissions, at the time, that seriously conflicted with Monika's account, nor with their shutting-up about those conflicts ever since. It has nothing to do with Monika being recorded, at the time, giving 2 different stories about how Jimi got the pills. It has nothing to do Sharon Lawrence remarking that Monika's demeanor was distressingly casual for someone who had Jimi Hendrix die in their flat the day before. It has nothing to do with Monika admitting on Caesar's own Dutch radio show in 1975 that "there was evidence that could not be brought to the police and that the mafia killed Hendrix 'for sure'". Make no mistake, the conflicts exposed by Kathy Etchingham in 1992 were soundly based on recorded evidence from the time. In fact it was comments like Slater's and Stickells', recorded in September 1970, that created the worst conflicts for both Monika and her reality-defying defender Caesar. I think we know who is playing tricks here and it isn't time.

Jimi definitely made some kind of poetic overtures of marriage towards Monika. He definitely did towards Kirsten Nefer and who knows how many other women. Jimi was a pretty spacey guy and had some deep personal inner world beliefs that only he understood. God knows what signs or cosmic dictates Jimi was guided by in his marriage flirtations. Whatever the case it seems fairly real that Jimi had some kind of weird marriage thing going between him and Monika. How real it was only Jimi and Monika knew. Jimi was having real problems with Jeffery. He was also known to depend on women for personal strength. So it could be Jimi was playing games with Jeffery by softening the wild man image Jeffery was trying to sell by getting married. The more subtle moves Jimi made against Jeffery the more Jimi could weaken his hold on him. These are the ways Jimi fought back. Cross says Jimi's army psychiatry records show he claimed he was gay. Obviously this was a ploy someone had told him would work to get him out of the army. So since we know Jimi exploited loopholes to get out of binds maybe he was looking for a wife as a contract shelter to shield money from Jeffery? Maybe someone told him about that loophole as well. Hard to say because Jimi was in equal need of someone to lean on, just as much as he was for a means to weaken Jeffery, not to mention the contract shelter. All said, the poem 'Until We Meet Again' sounds like a veiled break-up letter. Since Jimi was going back to New York this only furthers the complications. There's many interpretations to that poem. Perhaps Jimi was worried he might not make it back from New York after firing Jeffery?

I can't fathom why Caesar would include one of Monika's quotes from her book 'The Inner World Of Jimi Hendrix' telling how a man called her in September 1970 and threatened something nasty would happen to her if she spoke about Jimi's death. Caesar gives no comment on this. Well, isn't it obvious that if Jimi had died by accidental overdose as claimed then there would be no reason for people to threaten her. Monika's a psychologically interesting person. I personally believe this was Monika's way of relieving her guilt by indirectly revealing what happened. And this isn't the only place she did it. Her worst example of these indirect admissions is when she admitted on Caesar's radio show that the mafia killed Hendrix "for sure". I ask the readers to take note that Caesar never mentioned this important admission in his publication. If he was doing any kind of honest "investigation" you would think it would at least deserve mention? Even creepier is Monika's descriptions of men tilting Jimi's head back and not letting him breathe. Or Monika trying to push her way in to the resuscitation room and being pushed back out. If these things did not happen in the ambulance or at the hospital then where did they happen? Was it at the Samarkand? In any case, Caesar has real reason to not comment here.

The rest of page 44 gives sundry descriptions of Monika returning to Germany on the 29th and Jimi's funeral on October 1st. The funeral descriptions are worth reading for the names of those attending and their comments.

[Albert Doyle]

Page 45:


Finally on page 45 Caesar confronts Tappy Wright's recent admission that he heard Michael Jeffery confess to murdering Jimi. He does this under the column heading "Murdered By Manager BS". Caesar confronts this issue by making one of his classic pre-emptive proclamations that Wright is "incorrect". (Oh, no need to look any further I guess)

I'll start-off by saying the claim that pills were shoved down Jimi's throat followed by wine is provably wrong according to the forensics. Since we know Jimi's barbiturate blood level was .7mg percent of blood that means he probably had about an hour to reach that level before he died. Therefore no pills could have been shoved down Jimi's throat followed by wine because the pills would have come right back up after Jimi was drowned and vomited. But just because this claim doesn't match the forensics doesn't mean it didn't happen. The forensic evidence very much shows Jimi was drowned in wine as Dr Bannister witnessed. Whether Jeffery was covering for an accomplice (Monika?) is unknown. There's too many variables to list here, but the fact Jimi was drowned in wine suggests those who did so were anticipating him being incapacitated. You then have to wonder how the most powerful pills on the market got within Jimi's reach, or how this conforms to a classic black operation made to appear as a drug overdose.

As for Jeffery being in Spain we only have the word of Bob Levine whose participation in Jeffery's money laundering can only be guessed. Mr Levine was one of the loudest critics of Jeffery's behavior for decades and spoke to authors about Jeffery acting suspiciously and pretending he hadn't known about Jimi's death a week later (even though Caesar's own source, Jim Marron, confirmed he heard Jeffery speak of Jimi's death on the 18th). While picking quotes to suit his dishonest spin Caesar thinks we don't see him avoiding all the other qualifying information. Caesar got Levine to retract everything he said before and claim the murder theories are nonsense. A total retraction is very suspicious, and even more so when Caesar asks for no explanation why Levine completely reversed everything he's said for decades and made a blanket denial. What is Bob Levine trying to hide in order not to get dragged in to anything? Bob Levine said he spoke to Jeffery on the 17th in Majorca. Jeffery told Levine he would not be available the next day due to a boating outing. I think both Bob and Caesar missed an important clue here. Mike Jeffery was curiously not available during Jimi's worst crises. When Jimi was busted for heroin at Toronto Airport Customs Mike was nowhere to be found and couldn't be reached. When Jimi was kidnapped Jeffery was also strangely unavailable. In his haste to deny the murder I don't think Levine realizes he witnessed an important clue. Jeffery's telling him he wouldn't be available on the 18th was a typical MI-6 agent's routine of making himself unavailable once again during Jimi's worst crisis, as he had done before. All said, if you look at those who gave alibi's for Jeffery there's not a single one of them who says exactly where he was and what he was doing that established the alibi. However, even if Jeffery was in Majorca when Jimi was murdered that still doesn't mean he wasn't involved. Jeffery was a man quite capable, as the kidnapping showed, of getting other people to do his dirty work. Caesar deals with this business on an overly simple level that automatically disqualifies him from any serious investigation. When Caesar writes "nobody in Jimi's management knew about the Samarkand" he's relying on people's word. Many of those people are provably lying, yet Caesar takes them at their word and doesn't look any further. When Terry Slater slipped and admitted he was at the Samarkand on the evening of the 17th Caesar blames the reporter. When Monika admits unnamed people were at the flat Caesar has no curiosity about who they were or why Monika would not name them. If Caesar seriously wants to find-out how the murderers knew about the Samarkand he should look in to the lies and false stories he's trying to protect.

How did the murderers gain access to the flat? Many ways. If you are sharp you'll see Monika wrote in 'Inner World' that someone broke-in to her flat to steal her manuscript using a key. Well, if these people had a key after the murder then maybe they had one before? Right? This is another example of one of Monika's indirect admissions. There's too many variables to mention here, however the possibility Monika was somehow involved is very real. It would explain a lot of the unexplained conflicts. Once again, Caesar interprets the evidence backwards. Instead of admitting the lack of any signs of a break-in incriminates Monika he uses this to 'dismiss' the whole thing.

Jimi was obviously passed-out when he was drowned in wine. The forensics that the British Inquest never bothered to recognize or process prove this. So if we consider that persons were laying in wait to kill Jimi this way, it is reasonable to suspect they knew he would be incapacitated. Since Monika admitted "I gave Jimi the pills" that forces any objective investigator to wonder what her possible role was? Is this something someone would either be 'suicided' or commit suicide over?

Caesar then proceeds to ask a series of spurious questions that back his spin. They've already been answered in this rebuttal. Quickly: The Vesparax were provided by Monika as told. Next, Dr Teare probably actually did discover some remnant wine in the 400ml of "free fluid" he found in Jimi's left lung. Otherwise Caesar is foolish to expect Dr Teare to find wine Dr Bannister had suctioned-out and disposed of 3 days earlier at the hospital. The evidence that bottles of wine were poured down Jimi's windpipe was discovered by the good Dr Bannister who was later attacked for it (which is another pure sign of intel involvement). Monika's location during the murder is a good question. If we look at some of her indirect statements we might be able to figure that out. When did the cigarette trip actually happen? Who did Monika actually see tipping Jimi's head back, as she told, if it wasn't the ambulance drivers? (Monika: "The mafia killed Hendrix 'for sure'")

Whether Jeffery cashed-in on an insurance policy or not, he was seen with loads of cash after Jimi's death and paid-off substantial debts in the hundreds of thousands. Since Caesar doesn't even mention this or bother to explain its significance towards the subject we can pretty much assume he is attempting nothing close to any credible investigation. And I suppose Caesar isn't going to ask Bob Levine what exactly he witnessed in Jeffery's office about smuggling money to those Bahamian banks or the mafia loans? Bob?


Page 46:


On page 46 Caesar makes his best run at pushing his fractured theory through by claiming Jimi's Vesparax blood level was high enough to kill him on its own. This is a valid way to hide murder behind a drug overdose, which was exactly why the planners did it that way. Caesar achieves this diversion by claiming Jimi took the tablets at 7:30 as Monika claimed. If you simply believe Monika, as Caesar does, you can get away with this version. He then proceeds to chart how Jimi had a serious overdose that needed treating within 2 hours to prevent fatality. Using this ruse Caesar then moves towards his final thrust by saying in bold and underlined lettering that Jimi had no hope for survival after 9:45am, so therefore everything else is "irrelevant". I think smart people could see what Caesar is aware of and deliberately trying to deny in his wording. The simple way to answer this is Eric Burdon's admission that Monika called him at 5:45am, combined with Dr Bannister's witnessing of lungs full of wine, makes this version impossible. It really is as simple as that, and you can see the mendacious length Caesar goes to to get around this. Nice try, again, Caesar.

I have to give Caesar credit because he has done his homework well by finding several examples of Vesparax overdoses where the victims took the same number of tablets as Jimi. It's very clever. The victims die right around the 4 hour mark making Caesar's case look solid for Jimi dying perfectly in synch with these documented cases. There's a problem with this however. The 4 hour mark Caesar isolates as condemning actually works against him if we involve the real times. Since we know Jimi got back to the Samarkand at around 3am we can then look at Burdon's claimed 5:45am phone call from Monika and realize 4 hours had not elapsed. If we look at the death scene, Jimi was found by the ambulance attendants unmoved and untreated. What this tells you is the first people to discover him made no attempt to revive him. If they had you would not have found Jimi on his back and covered in vomit obviously in the same position he died in. This is basic detective work that Scotland Yard is world-famous for, and quite capable of, however they never seemed interested. What this tells you is Jimi was dead when Monika first started reaching-out with phone calls. Any normal person who found Jimi in distress would have wiped the vomit off him and tried to establish some breathing. As the ambulance men made clear, this was never done to Jimi. A smart detective would realize right away that those who first encountered Jimi in this condition knew he was dead, otherwise they would have wiped the vomit off and tried to get him breathing. In respect to this it would make sense that Monika reached-out because Jimi was dead at 5:45am. And once you consider that Jimi was murdered by being drowned in wine this makes perfect sense and fits all the evidence, and, especially, the lies. So what Caesar needs to do is add a little more data to his Vesparax overdose histories. For instance he needs find a case where the victim had been threatened with death by their MI-6/mafia manager if they fired them. He needs to find a directly analogous case where the victim was on COINTELPRO's Security Index. He needs to find a case where the victim was found drowned in wine. And, finally, he needs to find a case where there were curious lies and uninvestigated false stories by all the main witnesses. In effect, what Caesar does the most here is use a plausible excuse to avoid the most outstanding evidence. In the end the main question is how many of those other cases had lungs full of wine with a negligible blood alcohol count? (The answer is none) I hope people will notice the disparity between Caesar's ability to dig-up esoteric information on Vesparax vs his playing dumb on everything else.

Caesar defeats his own point, made a few pages back, by concluding Jimi must have known the number of tablets he took. Caesar obviously realizes he can't get around this. His solution is that Monika's story to her brother Klaus Peter must have been true and that Jimi took 9 tablets in order to sleep for a day and a half. OK, if this is true then why not admit it after all these years? Monika went to lengths to stick to her original story. Caesar emphasizes this solution by including "Until We Meet Again" in decorative script at the bottom of the column, as if this had solved the mystery in a Sherlock Holmes-like denouement. Not so fast Caesar. First of all, Monika was quoted as telling the reporter for Bild "I gave Jimi the pills". Since Monika tried to deny this statement it shows she felt guilt over it. So there's good reason to think Jimi never popped the tablets out of their blister packs as Caesar claims. Another thing is Monika said she had previously taken some for her back injury. If true then she would have known their serious strength and never allowed Jimi to take what she would have well-known to be an overdose. It's very obvious that Monika invented the story of Jimi sneaking the pills after she fell asleep. She was obviously trying to hide something. Even worse, in 'Inner World' Monika says Jimi turned to her and said he thought Devon had OD'ed him. Well, if we look at Monika's official story she says Jimi was awake and talking and in a good mood when she fell asleep at 7am. Jimi last saw Devon at Kameron's party. Devon was nodded-out when Jimi tried to get her to go along to the Samarkand. If Devon had dosed Jimi at Kameron's it had to be at least a while before she nodded-out, therefore any overdose Jimi felt at the Samarkand would have been well-underway by the time he got back there. With this in mind it is therefore impossible for Jimi to have claimed he was overdosed by Devon and still be happily talking to Monika in bed at 7am as she claimed. More likely Jimi had been overdosed by the Vesparax and hadn't realized it. Caesar is aware of all this which is why he steers completely clear of Monika's self-condemning manifest of lies known as 'The Inner World Of Jimi Hendrix'. The book is so full of these easily-seen conflicts that Caesar has to stay clear of it. In a way 'Inner World' a prime example of Monika's unique psychological condition and use of thinly-veiled double entendre to make indirect admissions. What Caesar doesn't account for here are the people who came forward and said Jimi enthusiastically planned to meet them the next day, Friday, so therefore it is unlikely he took a massive dose to sleep all day. And, trust me, Caesar knows of these claims and isn't mentioning them.

In a specially highlighted box at the bottom of the page Caesar gives various quotes from witnesses telling of Jeffery's insurance policies. Trixie Sullivan, Chas Chandler, and even Monika all confirm Jeffery had a 1 million dollar policy on Jimi. So whether Caesar proves Jeffery never collected on it or not he should be studied enough in Hendrix history to know Jeffery had ways around that and people who were willing to make loans on the policy. It should be kept in mind that Caesar never attempted to account for the loads of cash Jeffery was seen with after Jimi's death - and I think we know why. Besides Jeffery had stolen enough money from Jimi to account for that cash. As usual, Caesar never offers a peep over whether that stolen money could have been incentive for Jeffery to murder a man who had just fired him and would have made him legally account for it.


.

[Albert Doyle]

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.

[Albert Doyle]

Page 48:


You have to understand what Caesar is trying to do here on page 48. Caesar displays a full page record of Sharon Lawrence and lawyer Michael Shapiro's conversation over Jimi trying to fire Jeffery back in June 1969. What Caesar is trying to do here is show how impossible it was for Jimi to fire Jeffery. By doing this he is trying to indirectly suggest that since it was impossible for Jimi to fire Jeffery that any suggestion that Jimi was murdered for it is wrong. But this is just Caesar, once again, condemning himself by means of his own material. Jimi confided in Sharon Lawrence as a stable, reliable ear he could trust with his most personal thoughts. Sharon was a person outside and separate from the 60's rock circus surrounding Jimi and was the first stable female figure he could trust in his life. Because of this he went to her for advice over his troubles with Jeffery.

Jimi knew he had been set-up by Jeffery at the Toronto Customs heroin bust. Jeffery probably knew Jimi was starting to have thoughts of separating from him so suddenly Jimi gets busted for heroin and therefore has to totally depend on Jeffery to keep him from serious jail time. The month following this bust Jimi went to Sharon Lawrence and got her to go to Steingarten with him and voice his intention to sever Jeffery. Page 48 pretty much details that effort and shows how difficult it was for Jimi to remove himself from Jeffery. Again, Jimi wasn't stupid and the June effort to sever Jeffery came 1 month after the heroin bust. Jimi wasn't taken seriously by Steingarten and was patronizingly asked to gather evidence of malfeasance by Jeffery. In the end Steingarten was also Jeffery's lawyer, so, really, nothing could be done because Steingarten had split interests. So what Caesar is dishonestly trying to do here is establish Jimi knew, as far back as June 1969, that it was impossible to fire Jeffery.

Caesar is totally dishonest here because what he is actually registering is the fact Jimi initiated his separation from Jeffery at this time. A true and accurate interpretation of this event would show that from this point on Jimi was working to fire Jeffery and started a campaign of non-cooperation in order to discourage Jeffery and drive him off. After getting no result from his meeting with Steingarten Jimi then proceeded to break-up the Experience that month. He also retreated to the Catskills house and stopped touring. Jimi was most-definitely resisting Jeffery and going on strike. Caesar knows this which is why he limits the information by making absolutely no comment on the contents of this page or what it shows. Caesar is in full possession of the evidence and material to show Jeffery started using intimidation tactics, like mafia thugs shooting guns in Jimi's backyard and fake kidnappings, to overcome this resistance. Jeffery's cash flow started getting tight because of this, forcing him to make loans from the New York mob. By doing this Jeffery put indirect pressure on Jimi and countered Jimi's strike with typical espionage-type tactics. Jimi was having huge dirty pressure applied to him by the 'warm and friendly' Jeffery [as described on page 47 by his colleagues] (and not corrected by last-word-having Caesar).

What is once again outrageous about what Caesar presents here is that it actually shows the initiating event that led to Jimi's death. This is the true and obvious context of what Caesar relates on page 48. Jimi tried to fire Jeffery in June 1969 and then struggled with him for the next 15 months, trying to make his perfidy not pay-off. Jeffery's intractable control of Jimi, illustrated on page 48, only goes to show the malicious grip Jeffery had on Jimi and why Jimi tried to escape it. Jeffery was a man who, because of his wicked intentions for Jimi, would not allow himself to be fired, as page 48 shows. The crime Caesar commits here is that he tries to suggest Jimi had an appreciation from this event that he could never fire Jeffery, so therefore any suggestion he was murdered for firing him is false. But this is just Caesar up to his own wicked deception again. It's just Caesar attempting to put a false spin on the facts to suit his purposes. Caesar once again gives himself away by not being able to give any contextual comment on this. The less he says the better because any attempt to describe what is happening in this event will only lead him to show it was causatory in Jimi's death. Caesar shows that his effort here is one of deception by means of omission. Anyone truly trying to provide all the facts behind this would never leave out as much as Caesar does. What he leaves out is exactly what shows why what he writes isn't a true description of the events. And there you have Caesar Glebbeek and 'Until We Meet Again'.



Page 49:



What Caesar does on this page is truly pathetic and serves as an epic betrayal of the person upon whom Caesar has based his life's efforts for decades. Once again Caesar lays out various comments from different main witnesses in a style that suggests the reader will make his own decision as to what the material says. This is a deplorable strategy being deployed by Caesar in order to deceive the reader. What is shown here is multiple accounts of Jimi's suicide attempts and witnessings of his depressed suicidal nature. It is written in a way that suggests the reader is being exposed to some previously-hidden shocking aspect of Jimi that shines new light on his death. Caesar once again lays out a map of the differing comments on Jimi to show that 1) Jimi was surrounded by completely-opposing descriptions of the same event, and 2) that the reader can pick which one he wants to believe. What Caesar does is muddy the waters to give merit to suicide claims in order push his conclusion, but he does it in a dishonest way that floats quotes as a smokescreen rather than any honest interpretation.

Mixed in to Caesar's smear sheet are quotes from Noel and lawyer Mark Sandground telling how Steingarten lawyer Steve Weiss had made sloppy mistakes that caused Jimi great stress in his lawsuits with Chalpin. Also listed were the paternity suits against Jimi that caused him serious stress. The reason Caesar includes these comments is to indirectly suggest Jimi was at his wit's end because of it and became suicidal as he had been before. Have no doubt Caesar is posing himself as a defense lawyer offering character-assassinating material against Jimi being posed as honest truth. The intended effect of this material is to plant the unconscious assumption in the reader's mind that Jimi had attempted suicide before and had good reason to do it again on the 18th. This is a very devious maneuver on Caesar's behalf equal to a Judas betrayal.

I guess Jimi was a very emotional person who reacted dramatically to life's injustices. This overt expression is part of what made him a great artist. If he did make some dramatic gestures by cutting his wrist during a time of life crisis it was more for acting-out than killing himself as the tiny injuries and ineffective results showed. In all 3 claimed examples of "suicide attempts" by Jimi you can see he wasn't very good at it and when he allegedly did so he never managed to kill himself. A good psychiatrist would probably say Jimi's "suicide attempts" were more reaching-out for help than anything else. So, once again, have no doubt that Caesar is directly inferring that all the ingredients that caused Jimi to attempt to commit suicide before were all there on the 18th. By doing this in a way that lays out all the quotes, without any comment, Caesar is suggesting that he is showing reverence to Jimi by not speaking directly, and that the events of the 18th could very well have been another damage-control action by persons who knew the real cause. But this is just a crime against Jimi and I'll show you why. It's an effort to obstruct the real evidence by clouding it with out-of-context quotes that come from people so close to the event that it lends them credibility.

If you pay close attention, the three people who were closest to the event and it's real cause, Monika, Chas, and Jeffery, all say with confidence that Jimi didn't commit suicide. This isn't surprising because those three persons all knew Jimi was murdered. While trying not to expose themselves in their comments, all three can't help but express what they already know, that is, that Jimi was murdered. Monika shows her typical psychopathic tendency to give conflicting information in the same place by suggesting she couldn't figure-out why Jimi took so many pills but then follows it up by saying she was "absolutely certain Jimi did not commit suicide". Well, it's not hard to figure-out why a person who witnesses a murder would have that certainty.

There's two players here who merit closer scrutiny. First is Steve Weiss, one of Steingarten's hip young lawyers assigned to Hendrix. His legalistic backing of the infamous Inquest and its findings is suspicious. Frankly, the way he speaks sounds defensive as if he knew the real reason. Eric Burdon went out of his way to claim Jimi committed suicide. If we look at Burdon's background and knowledge of Jeffery it is highly suspicious that he went out of his way to claim suicide so strongly. Burdon was complicit in covering-up the true times involved that morning. One has to wonder if Eric would go to such lengths to cover-up what he thought was a suicide by cleaning the flat for 5 hours and then lying about it?

The text and wording of Monika's, Jeffery's, Weiss', and Chas's quotes gives away what they truly knew. If you read what they say it's obvious all four knew Jimi was murdered. Caesar will never point this out because he just takes everybody at their word and never makes any abstract criticism or analysis. Let's read Chas' quote: "I don't believe for one minute he killed himself. That was out of the question. But something had to happen and there was no way of stopping it. You just get a feeling sometimes. It was as if the last couple of years had prepared us for it. It was like the message I had been waiting for." - Now if you compare this statement to the one Chas made on British TV: "Anyone who speaks of the real way Jimi died will have his head blown-off", you can see right away what is really being said and how. Keep in mind this is the same person who said on 'The Wink Of An Eye' that when his father told him Jimi had died the first words out of Lotta's mouth were "Mike Jeffery!"

No, Caesar knows damned-well that Jimi was in the middle of preparing for major life moves and a new musical direction. If Caesar bothered to include the full honest context of the events surrounding Jimi during that last week he would include the fact Jimi was upbeat and positive about breaking-away from Jeffery and taking charge of his new musical future. Jimi was just the opposite of depressed and desperate. He was positive and ambitious and pro-actively taking charge of righting his ship. These are hardly the personal conditions or circumstances that someone would then respond to by committing suicide. You simply don't make those moves and then commit suicide right in the process. That makes no sense and Caesar is fully aware of it and that's why he completely omits these qualifying facts. The sad truth is the true reason the quotes Caesar presents are so speculative is because the people making them are fully aware Jimi was murdered and why. As is typical of his entire presentation Caesar then construes this oppositely from what it really says and exploits the deception rather than exposing its form. And we haven't even touched the forensic evidence that shows Jimi was murdered by being drowned in wine. So, if Caesar wants to highlight text for emphasis and suggest everything prior is irrelevant THIS is the place where he should do it. The evidence and witnessing that Jimi was drowned in wine pre-empts his entire effort of lies and also puts them in proper perspective. Something Caesar conspicuously steers clear of throughout his shameful disinformation campaign otherwise known as 'Until We Meet Again'.


Page 50:


Page 50 offers a list of main Hendrix witnesses who have died since Jimi's death.

Finally, Caesar wraps-up the publication with some parting remarks. He gives the words of Alan Douglas making contemplative, eulogistic summations of Jimi and his life. The effect is a final word closure on Jimi and what happened to him. These people were involved in a scandal that ended-up in Jimi's death. They tend to get highly philosophical as sort of a psychological mechanism by which to escape the awareness of what happened to Jimi and their involvement in it. Monika says "I do believe that...Jimi is very happy where he is. Nobody can hurt him anymore..." Well, Monika, what exactly are you referring to when you speak of Jimi being "hurt"?

Chas Chandler: "It's trite to say there are pressures on musicians, but there were a million on Hendrix." ("Million"? Like in million dollar life insurance policy Chas?)

What is Chas really saying here?



Page 51:


Index of sources and interviews.

[Albert Doyle]

To sum up, why Caesar decided to insult Jimi Hendrix's memory this way I don't know. Apparently, being the publisher of a major Hendrix fan magazine he decided to access the Hendrix inner circle through Monika Dannemann. He says he met her in the 1980's and conducted several interviews with her. I guess from that point on he became a Monika defender. His use "anti-MD" and "Monika haters" to describe people who defend Jimi is kind of jejune and accents the petty level at which he deals. Surely anyone who has researched the real evidence behind Jimi's death would know that the conflicts exist outside of Monika Dannemann or anything exclusively confined to just herself or any alleged hatred for her personally. The reason people resent Monika is because she lied about what happened that morning, and now Hendrix magazine owner Caesar Glebbeek has joined her in those lies. Monika bore false witness to the way Jimi died. I think that is what people are "anti" about and not some kind of tabloidistic drama Caesar has created in order to draw attention away from the real evidence.

The wicked offense Caesar has committed against Jimi really has to be spelled-out here. You have to understand what an obscene violation Caesar has committed. In the post Tappy Wright era Caesar has campaigned and made an overt effort to lead the public away from the true cause of Jimi's death. Our world has become a creepy place. A few years ago if someone in Caesar's position had dared such an evil betrayal they would have been railed against and exposed. People would not have stood for it. In this new era of dumb-downed selfish stupidity it doesn't even register. It's just another thing for disconnected, hedonistic observers to look at. Bring the evidence to Hendrix internet sites and you get attacked by sick/stupid trolls backed by dim-witted British moderators and fuzzy site-owners. The Hendrix murder issue is a nuisance to those people because it interrupts their sucking off Jimi's treasure. Truth is, while they say they are "celebrating Jimi and his life" they are basically helping his murderers and don't really give a damn as long as they have his treasure. They're just Hendrix punks, really, and don't have the qualification or credibility to judge this matter. I think they know that, which is why they attack and ban anyone who tries to tell the truth. They share in Caesar's betrayal.

The offense both Caesar and these moronic Hendrix "fans" commit is they put Hendrix in the exact same monkey cage Jeffery did at the time. These people are too ignorant/degenerate to realize they are committing the exact offense that pained Jimi at the time and ultimately led to his murder. Jimi is, once again, only a 'sensation' to be sold within the circus cage of an internet site or magazine. Jimi himself doesn't really matter to these people, just the ease of his consumption. Jimi's murder doesn't fit-in to that so they actively work to remove both it and those who fight to prove it. They're cowards and their objective is to make Jimi stay in his cage and be easier to exploit. Caesar is a particularly vicious Judas because he actively fights against the evidence, as shown above, as a direct representative of Jimi and the information surrounding his life. This is an act that usually receives severe moral condemnation, but since Jimi is such a singularly exotic entity it makes him much more easy to see as an exception and force back in to that UniVibes cage. Jimi is merely an object to be used. Having him not murdered is much easier than having him murdered. Since these people are spineless they find it much more comfortable to enjoy Hendrix without the discomfort of admitting he was murdered. Jimi and his murder are merely the possession of a mob now that sees itself as the embodiment of Hendrix reality and will force and dictate how Jimi and the evidence around his death will be seen. Disagree with them and you'll be attacked and ostracized by some very scummy, cowardly methods. These people don't give a damn about Jimi they just care about their taking-over of him and his image. The actual evidence for Jimi's murder has no effect on these scum and they won't hesitate to persecute you for it. This is the constituency Caesar carters to in his betrayal of Jimi Hendrix as a famous Jimi Hendrix source. Unfortunately this is a tradition that goes all the way back to when Jimi was alive, so it explains why Jimi's murder was never solved. The evidence for Jimi's murder was always in the hands of this mob that was either too disinterested or unable to realize it. Their eyes probably won't get this far on the page because their dull/delinquent minds don't possess the character to honestly seek the truth this deep into the rebuttal. It was always easier to marvel at Jimi's phenomenal talent than wreck your high by realizing he was murdered. If you read the responses of these fools they don't really say much in response to Caesar's work. The reason is they know it isn't defensible, but since they've already allowed themselves the privilege of ignoring the issue they don't see any need to care.

So, what Caesar has done here is indefensible. It's obscene. It's basically an Orwellian effort to reverse all the obvious evidence of Jimi's murder in order to reach a false conclusion. Why Caesar does that I'll never know. At the end of 'Until We Meet Again' he pronounces that this will be the last time he speaks on this ugly subject and that he will not respond any further or answer any questions on the matter. Well, I think that's obvious for what it is. Caesar is enough of an egotistical ass, exploiting the cowardly indifference of the Hendrix public, to think he can get away with that. Any person of average intelligence would see that Caesar is incapable of responding to credible critics of his offerings. Caesar has not responded before. He went to the Hollywood Today website and offered a preview by saying if Jeffery had gone to London that night it would have been stamped on his passport. When Tappy Wright appeared and commented that since Jeffery was killed in a plane crash, while carrying his passport, it therefore would not be available to check, Caesar then disappeared and removed the passport claim from the final publication. This is an example of the "last-word" farce "investigation" Caesar offered and once again ran-away from. It's embarrassing for anyone who actually cares about Hendrix, and should spur anger.

The facts about Jimi Hendrix's death are slowly emerging. Because of Tappy Wright's claim there's many people now doing research to explore what really happened to Jimi. If you read the rebuttal above you'll see that Caesar has come nowhere close to offering any "final word". The above rebuttal is merely an offhand page by page index of 'Until We Meet Again" and its flaws. It's really an arcane piece designed for those who have read Caesar's work so they can reference, page by page, what is wrong with his material. If someone wanted to put the effort to it a more researched rebuttal could be done with ten times the amount of credibly-referenced information. Hopefully Caesar and his pathetic betrayal will spur a greater interest in revealing the truth behind this.

May Caesar's name now be known in the Hendrix Community as the cowardly Judas that he is. May he be known as the man who tried to sell Jimi's head on a UniVibes silver platter to his murderers for magazine sales. Once again, Caesar has good reason to not comment, and he won't be able to pronounce his way out of this one.

[Albert Doyle]

A new Hendrix movie is currently being filmed. It is titled 'All Is By My Side'. The subject will be the period in Jimi's career where he made his first album 'Are You Experienced?' This will be the first major Hendrix movie since 'Jimi Hendrix Soundtrack' (1973).


It just struck me that this period in Hendrix's career was literally politically-devoid and was his most politically neutral period. He was trying to make it and get discovered in England. This was an apolitical period for Jimi before he got on the FBI Security Index and had Black Panther involvement trumped-up in his FBI files, or became a figurehead of the American counter-culture, anti-war movement. I have no doubt intel is using Hollywood to create an apolitical image of Jimi right in the wake of Tappy Wright's book where he admitted hearing Hendrix's manager Michael Jeffery confess to murdering him. This first Hendrix major motion picture in nearly 40 years happened to get funding right after Tappy Wright's book created a suppressed controversy over Jimi's death. Have no doubt its purpose is to exhaust public interest in Hendrix right before presentations on his death emerge post-Tappy Wright, and fill the public's mind with a happier, apolitical Jimi Hendrix prior to the US government's shadow COINTELPRO interest in him.

[Magda Hassan]

Sorry, don't know where part 2 is...I haven't yet watched this but though Albert might like to comment.

[Magda Hassan]

Found the rest of the movie here http://www.onlinemoviebuzz.com/2011/11/j...-24-hours/

[Albert Doyle]

Alex Constantine was the first to put it all together correctly. His Hendrix murder writing was only one chapter in a multi-chapter book on other covert rock murders though, so he wasn't as in-depth as he could have been. Alex is the thin blonde guy in the full video.


I'm currently involved in research on this. The friends of Hendrix in the first few minutes of the "part 1" video don't realize that Jimi was voicing concern over threats Michael Jeffery had made to him. They don't understand the full background so they say "Jimi had a premonition of his death". Well, if you can call Jeffery kidnapping him and threatening to kill him "premonition," OK.

Jimi was a pure artist with his head in his art all the time. He wasn't the type who would respond with legal defense etc. It wouldn't matter anyway because Michael Jeffery was MI-6 and was immune from any legal action against him - which is why Scotland Yard ignored everything you see shown in these videos. Nobody suspected the Kennedy Assassination-like intrigue behind Jimi's death. These Hendrix rock hippies were like lambs being led to CIA slaughter. Jimi too...