|
Post by John S. Damm on Aug 21, 2013 14:24:08 GMT -5
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Aug 21, 2013 22:12:36 GMT -5
Think I'll pass on this one.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Aug 21, 2013 22:32:33 GMT -5
I've heard both stories, that he dragged himself forward, spoke his name to the cop, ...etc., and that, with the wounds he had, he would have fallen dead on the spot.
It's sad. Like interviews with pus sucker, it's a morbid fascination.
Five bullets hit, no four. They had to count them all. Now they know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 22, 2013 6:17:21 GMT -5
What does the author base this theory on? I haven't been able to read his story, but I'm probably going to stick with the account as told by the policemen who took John to the hospital in their police car. There were accounts that he was asked if he was John Lennon, and John managed to say "Yes", which was probably his last word. John died in the patrol car en route to the hospital. And yes, there have always been the eye witness accounts of John's stumbling forward and making it to the rear of the Dakota where he collapsed in the back office. I believe there was even an account of John saying "I'm shot" before then, or something.
A very unsettling topic to be sure, but I don't think John was dead instantaneously. I think he knew he'd been shot and lived for several minutes. It has always made me wonder if John thought of the irony of the way he was dying at the moment.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Aug 22, 2013 9:07:47 GMT -5
What does the author base this theory on? I haven't been able to read his story, but I'm probably going to stick with the account as told by the policemen who took John to the hospital in their police car. There were accounts that he was asked if he was John Lennon, and John managed to say "Yes", which was probably his last word. John died in the patrol car en route to the hospital. And yes, there have always been the eye witness accounts of John's stumbling forward and making it to the rear of the Dakota where he collapsed in the back office. I believe there was even an account of John saying "I'm shot" before then, or something. A very unsettling topic to be sure, but I don't think John was dead instantaneously. I think he knew he'd been shot and lived for several minutes. It has always made me wonder if John thought of the irony of the way he was dying at the moment. This subject is very distasteful as a book subject, so I have no interest in reading about it from someone who was not there. But I will say, based on the eyewitness police reports, I have always thought John lived long enough to comprehend what had happened to him. My guess is the issue of his quote 14 years earlier of "We're (The Beatles) more popular than Jesus" had to run through his mind as he tried to understand why someone had shot him. Ever since that quote there had always been the fear some religious fanatic would go after John for that remark. I would say thankfully that was not the case, but the reason he was shot is even more disgusting.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Aug 22, 2013 9:26:44 GMT -5
What does the author base this theory on? I haven't been able to read his story, but I'm probably going to stick with the account as told by the policemen who took John to the hospital in their police car. There were accounts that he was asked if he was John Lennon, and John managed to say "Yes", which was probably his last word. John died in the patrol car en route to the hospital. And yes, there have always been the eye witness accounts of John's stumbling forward and making it to the rear of the Dakota where he collapsed in the back office. I believe there was even an account of John saying "I'm shot" before then, or something. A very unsettling topic to be sure, but I don't think John was dead instantaneously. I think he knew he'd been shot and lived for several minutes. It has always made me wonder if John thought of the irony of the way he was dying at the moment. This subject is very distasteful as a book subject, so I have no interest in reading about it from someone who was not there. But I will say, based on the eyewitness police reports, I have always thought John lived long enough to comprehend what had happened to him. My guess is the issue of his quote 14 years earlier of "We're (The Beatles) more popular than Jesus" had to run through his mind as he tried to understand why someone had shot him. Ever since that quote there had always been the fear some religious fanatic would go after John for that remark. I would say thankfully that was not the case, but the reason he was shot is even more disgusting. John's death is as senseless as the poor Australian baseball scholarship student- gunned down jogging by teens just for fun. Those three "kids" will go to juvy, then to real prison for hopefully a very long time. It is one thing with drugs and robberies, where the criminal has a motive and probably even knows there's a risk. But to just kill someone for the heck of it, I am amazed that they had no sense whatsoever that "I might spend the rest of my life in a 12 by 12 cell getting "initiated" daily by Bubba".
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Aug 22, 2013 9:45:34 GMT -5
I hope the initial accounts are wrong because I hope and pray John did not realize what was going on: that would mean he suffered horribly with the realization he was mortally wounded. I think of how the initial accounts of that Conn,. school shooting were wildly wrong: the shooter's mother was a teacher there(false), the school let the shooter in because he was a teacher's son(false), etc., etc. Stephen Spiro the NYC cop who popped his mouth off the most about John's murder wrote letters with John's killer through the years and now has sold them or is trying to. www.cnn.com/2013/02/17/us/new-york-chapman-lettersWhat a scumbag so I don't believe a word he says as from day 1 this copper thought he stumbled onto a goldmine. He says he was writing John's killer to get in the killer's head. That is what every pervert says who is busted viewing kiddie porn, they were researching it. Spiro is the source for much of the CW on John's shooting and this cop clearly had a financial motive to embellish his role and what he saw or heard. I admit it is a strange topic for a book and I said so at the start of this Thread but the book was in the news this week so it bears being reported on. I do not like the title for sure. I for one though hope the CW on John's shooting is wrong and I hope John went fast without the prolonged suffering or realization of the horror. There was enough horror witnessed by Yoko who survives. O'Donnell is not a hack writer from what I have read from him before so I would like to know more about his sources and research.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Aug 22, 2013 18:04:28 GMT -5
"and other stories."
I don't want to read someone making up stories about this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 2:31:20 GMT -5
I watched a documentary on John which includes an interview with the doctor who worked on John when the police got him to hospital.
The doctor described Johns horrific internal injuries and he said John had no chance, if John didn't die instantly he wouldn't have lasted long after the final shot, a minute or 2 is not long in life terms.
Why would anyone want to discuss the last moments anyway FFS, murder is murder regardless of how long the expiry process lasted...
What a pile of morbid manure that book will be....
No Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 23, 2013 6:22:48 GMT -5
I watched a documentary on John which includes an interview with the doctor who worked on John when the police got him to hospital. The doctor described Johns horrific internal injuries and he said John had no chance, if John didn't die instantly he wouldn't have lasted long after the final shot, a minute or 2 is not long in life terms. Why would anyone want to discuss the last moments anyway FFS, murder is murder regardless of how long the expiry process lasted... What a pile of morbid manure that book will be.... No Thanks I must confess to having a morbid curiosity of John's final moments, but that's because he's John Lennon and I'm a Lennon fan. I have always wondered if he knew what had happened to him, and by all accounts of people on the scene, he may have. The doctor who described John's condition certainly knows his field I'm sure, but he was not present on the scene. I believe John stumbled forward, collapsed in the rear office, and was carried out into the police car where he expired after the cop tried to keep him talking and asked if he was JL .
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Aug 23, 2013 11:33:27 GMT -5
While there may be a place for detailed, scientific and medical writings on John's actual death, I do not like this book's title at all and I would question O'Donnell about it if I saw him at a Beatlefest or book signing.
What disappoints me is that his book The Day John Met Paul is an absolutely beautiful historical novel that moved me as much as The Killer Angels, the classic and Pulitzer Prize winning historical novel of the American Civil War's Battle of Gettysburg by Michael Shaara. In a good historical novel, all of the basic facts are true like the names of the people, the places, the dates, and the settings Where the fiction comes in is really in just some of the conversations between the real people as there is no way conversations from decades ago can be memorialized verbatim if not actually recorded.
O'Donnell does a stunning job of bringing Liverpool to life on that famous day John met Paul. It was a very moving book and ultimately uplifting.
I do not know O'Donnell's qualifications to write on very detailed medical topics such as John's mortal wounds from multiple gunshots.
|
|
|
Post by theman on Aug 25, 2013 19:00:14 GMT -5
Disturbing, to say the least. I don't like to think a lot about that night, which is up there in the top 3 worst days of my life.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Aug 26, 2013 3:16:00 GMT -5
Funny how no one knows exactly what happened at the scene.
Everyone seems to have "heard stories".
Hmmmmm , I wonder why.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2013 4:05:34 GMT -5
Funny how no one knows exactly what happened at the scene. Everyone seems to have "heard stories". Hmmmmm , I wonder why. Yoko and the doorman will know exactly what happened, Yoko probably doesn't care about semantics, dead is dead however long it took.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 26, 2013 6:36:56 GMT -5
Funny how no one knows exactly what happened at the scene. Everyone seems to have "heard stories". Hmmmmm , I wonder why. What's "funny" or "hmmm" to wonder about? The jerk who killed Lennon was a disturbed fan, which occurred from out of nowhere one evening, and there was no "government plotting" or any such nonsense. The plan was hatched only in the warped mind of this killer, and so nobody was expecting it, nobody was prepared for it. In fact, it makes all the sense in the world that there weren't more precise details because it was a random act by one person acting all alone. If your silly theory of "government conspiracy" was correct, then there would likely have been MORE details and witnesses in waiting -- not fewer. There were witnesses though -- Yoko Ono and the doorman named Jose who was on duty that evening. Later on, the cops who arrived at the scene of the crime talked about what they experienced. So what do you mean by "everyone seems to have heard stories"...? Who can possibly tell how many steps John took after being shot, or what he said, or if he died on the spot quickly, except maybe Yoko? If your bizarre "conspiracy scandal" was true, then the likelihood would be that there were MORE details and MORE people who watched or were prepared.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Aug 26, 2013 6:52:11 GMT -5
I wish this thread would die a quick death!
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Aug 26, 2013 8:46:11 GMT -5
Not so fast Mike, the Thread itself is about a new book on John which merits mention on a Beatles Board even if it is a book that at first blush seems offensive. Now where the conversation heads is a different matter. Just yesterday J.D. Salinger was in the news as a headline as a new biography on him claims new books will be published by the late, reclusive writer. And of course, "He who shall not be named" gets a mention in the article because the authors of this new biography saw fit to quote the killer on his obsession with The Catcher in the Rye which I would think pleased the killer to no end, to be quoted in a book on Salinger. That angered me because that is just the type of publicity the killer eats up. In fact, I bet that is the killer's favorite publicity, to be tied to The Catcher In The Rye. www.cbsnews.com/8301-207_162-57600006/new-j.d-salinger-books-coming-biographers-claim/Unfortunately, whenever I hear the name Salinger I instantly think of his book and then the killer. It is similar to how Manson hijacked "Helter Skelter" and the White Album. Almost every writing on the White Album must mention the Manson killings.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Aug 26, 2013 9:07:55 GMT -5
I wish this thread would die a quick death! Amen.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Aug 27, 2013 2:21:49 GMT -5
Funny how no one knows exactly what happened at the scene. Everyone seems to have "heard stories". Hmmmmm , I wonder why. Yoko and the doorman will know exactly what happened, Yoko probably doesn't care about semantics, dead is dead however long it took. Yes and hopefully Yoko will do what Jackie Kennedy has done and she will make available information she knows about the assassination years after she has gone and perhaps Sean as well to protect him. If by doorman you are referring to Jose Perdomo who was guarding the entrance of the Dakota on the night, then yes he will know exactly who the shooter was and wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Aug 27, 2013 2:39:39 GMT -5
Funny how no one knows exactly what happened at the scene. Everyone seems to have "heard stories". Hmmmmm , I wonder why. What's "funny" or "hmmm" to wonder about? The jerk who killed Lennon was a disturbed fan, which occurred from out of nowhere one evening, and there was no "government plotting" or any such nonsense. The plan was hatched only in the warped mind of this killer, and so nobody was expecting it, nobody was prepared for it. In fact, it makes all the sense in the world that there weren't more precise details because it was a random act by one person acting all alone. If your silly theory of "government conspiracy" was correct, then there would likely have been MORE details and witnesses in waiting -- not fewer. There were witnesses though -- Yoko Ono and the doorman named Jose who was on duty that evening. Later on, the cops who arrived at the scene of the crime talked about what they experienced. So what do you mean by "everyone seems to have heard stories"...? Who can possibly tell how many steps John took after being shot, or what he said, or if he died on the spot quickly, except maybe Yoko? If your bizarre "conspiracy scandal" was true, then the likelihood would be that there were MORE details and MORE people who watched or were prepared. Sorry but your're wrong, Chapman is not disturbed and has never been declared insane. If he really was crazy he would have shot himself on the night as well. When I say everyone has "heard stories" what I mean is that there is not one testimony that says what exactly happened. Straight after the event there were "witnesses" on tv who fed second hand information to the media about what actually happened ie they were not there but they "heard" shots being fired, the doorman "told' them there was a short scuffle. This plants seeds in the minds of people and for the so called "witness" there is no accountability whatseover. The police report provides very little information about the crime scene other than the identies of the victim, the suspect and the two arresting officers. You can find the police report online. As an example the police provided no documented record of the crime scene, suspicious people like me must rely on newspaper accounts and television coverage to reconstruct events. For some reason the initial description of the shooting changed quite a bit from what was printed in the NYT on the morning of Dec. 9, 1980, less than eight hours after Lennon was murdered. NYT writer Les Ledbetter wrote the following: "The police said the suspect stepped from an alcove and emptied several shots into Mr. Lennon while standing in a combat position." I thought Chapman was standing at the entrance of the Dakota and where did the writer get the detail about Chapman standing in a combat position ? How could he have been at two places at once. This makes a huge difference as knowing where MDC was standing would prove which direction the bullets came from and if they really came from MDC. Why isn't such basic detail about the crime scene documented ? Mikev pointed out the young Aussie guy from Melbourne who was living in the US being gunned down by three d-heads as he was jogging around his area and yet we found out everything about that crime scene, even the guy who tried to revive the young Aussie.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 27, 2013 13:59:20 GMT -5
The conspiracy revealed!!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 27, 2013 17:08:09 GMT -5
Sorry but your're wrong, is not disturbed and has never been declared insane. If he really was crazy he would have shot himself on the night as well. First of all, I never said he was "crazy". I said "disturbed", which means a whole bunch of things -- depressed, confused, angry and upset. He was facing an identity crisis also. I definitely believe he was mentally ill in those days and at the time of the murder. But where do you get this idea that "if you're crazy, you shoot yourself too"...? This is a guarantee, a mandatory requirement? That's a new one on me. (And I also do not believe that all suicidal people are "crazy"). Yeah, there is only one story -- John was shot in the back, by the jerk you keep naming, as seen and witnessed by Jose the doorman (and possibly Yoko, though she was walking ahead of John). We were specifically talking about how long John lived after he was shot, whether he immediately expired, etc. That type of thing you cannot know unless you were right there on the spot during the incident, and it came out of nowhere and nobody was prepared for it -- no cameras, no news reporters. (The killer himself, by the way, once said in one of his many testimonies: "I thought he was just gonna fall down ... fall down dead.... , but he kept walking. My God, those were [whatever type] bullets -- enough to knock a man off his feet...".) I'm sure I have read more on the case than you have. I was 18 at the time, living close to New York City, and I have a lot of off-the-air news footage from the days on December 1980 (I did not have a VCR at the time; this historic material was obtained by another fan from NY who I knew). I never heard the doorman Jose say "there was a scuffle" between John and his killer, if that's what you mean. But the doorman DID shake the gun from the killer's hand and kicked it away, which has been confirmed many times. Where's the part where it says the politicians set John up? What are you even talking about? The jerk was hanging around the archway of the Dakota, standing around. When John walked passed him, he dropped down into a combat stance, and fired. Have you ever been to the Dakota building? I have, quite a number of times. "Entrance way", "Archway", "Alcove" -- it all indicates the same thing. There is a ton of details about the events of this murder, you can find it everywhere since it occurred. How much detail did you expect them to specify or even know about, in the wee early hours of December 9th? Where were YOU in the several hours immediately following John's murder? I was religiously listening to NY radio and trying to piece together some sense to a senseless act, and contradicting details were cropping up all the time. That's always the way it happens. I was there at the time, listening to the radio -- they started out saying the killer was about 40 originally... they didn't know where he came from or anything -- it takes time to get details. What's your point? So this means that Reagan or someone high up ordered John to be taken down for being a house husband and singing about "Woman", and "Beautiful Boy"? Where is all your evidence on Lennon's killer being some sort of "hired patsy" to take the fall?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 27, 2013 17:14:34 GMT -5
If by doorman you are referring to Jose Perdomo who was guarding the entrance of the Dakota on the night, then yes he will know exactly who the shooter was and wasn't. Have you ever followed this case according to the detailed descriptions of the killer, and Jack Jones who did many interviews with him? Have you heard about Jose's recounting? He shook the gun from the killer's hand and kicked it away -- and it was the guy you've mentioned. Seriously, have you read much in the past 33 years on this stuff? Next thing you're going to tell us is that OJ Simpson did not really commit that Goldman/Brown double murder and there is another killer still unknown to this day. So someone else set John Lennon up, hired this Hawaii resident (or do you think it was someone else?)... and nobody has produced any evidence of this. Do you literally not believe that this killer was the guy who actually shot John? You think that was also "made up"?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 27, 2013 17:32:26 GMT -5
Yes and hopefully Yoko will do what Jackie Kennedy has done and she will make available information she knows about the assassination years after she has gone and perhaps Sean as well to protect him. All she knows is that she was walking and heard gunshots, and John was killed. Give us a break.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Aug 27, 2013 18:14:59 GMT -5
If by doorman you are referring to Jose Perdomo who was guarding the entrance of the Dakota on the night, then yes he will know exactly who the shooter was and wasn't. Have you ever followed this case according to the detailed descriptions of the killer, and Jack Jones who did many interviews with him? Have you heard about Jose's recounting? He shook the gun from the killer's hand and kicked it away -- and it was the guy you've mentioned. Seriously, have you read much in the past 33 years on this stuff? Next thing you're going to tell us is that OJ Simpson did not really commit that Goldman/Brown double murder and there is another killer still unknown to this day. So someone else set John Lennon up, hired this Hawaii resident (or do you think it was someone else?)... and nobody has produced any evidence of this. Do you literally not believe that this killer was the guy who actually shot John? You think that was also "made up"? Yes I have read countless accounts and nobody can state simply what happened from the time John stepped out of the limo to the time he was shot. Where was he standing ? Where was the shooter standing ? Who actually saw it ? Jose Perdomo's name was not publically disclosed until 1987, over 6 years since the murder happened. The first stories in the New York Times (Dec. 9 & 10, 1980) failed to mention Perdomo by name, although they mentioned the "doorman" several times. On June 22, 1981, People Magazine published an article about Chapman, written by Jim Gaines. Again, the article mentioned the doorman but failed to identify Perdomo by name. In 1983, Peter Brown the Beatles insider , published a book—co-written by Steven Gaines—entitled, The Love You Make: An Insider's Story of The Beatles. Not only did Brown and Gaines fail to identify Perdomo by name, they actually referred to the doorman by the wrong name: Jay Hastings. Hastings was a real person who worked at the Dakota and was on duty when Lennon was killed, but Hastings was not the doorman. Hastings was the desk clerk in the lobby which is different from the doorman. As far as I know, Hastings did not witness the shooting because he was in the lobby at his desk when the shooting occurred, and Lennon was shot outside, but ran inside the lobby and collapsed. Whether it was done intentionally or not, Jim Gaines' article in 1987 forced other writers and publishers to come clean and reveal the name of doorman Jose Perdomo to the public, something that was clearly a guarded secret. So once again I ask you, how can basic facts like this be so difficult to obtain and why are they wrong or withheld for long periods of time ? If nobody has anything to hide, recounting the events should not be such a difficult thing. Next point - Jose Perdomo asked Chapman after John had been shot if he knew what he had done. This story was tossed around by several sources for years, but again, Perdomo's name was not released to the public until March 2, 1987 when Jim Gaines wrote an article about Chapman for People Magazine entitled, "In the Shadows a Killer Waited." In 1983, Peter Brown & Steven Gaines erroneously reported—in their book, The Love You Make—that it was Jay Hastings who asked the question, that Hastings was the doorman, something we now know is absolutely incorrect. Even so, Jim Gaines' article did not mention Perdomo asking Chapman if he knew what he had done. As far as I can determine, Fenton Bresler was the first person to specifically identify Jose Perdomo as the doorman who asked Chapman if he knew what he had done, to which Chapman replied, "I just shot John Lennon." (Ref. Bresler, p 230) Again, Perdomo had already been identified as the doorman by Jim Gaines, but it was Bresler who identified Perdomo specifically as the person who asked Chapman if he knew what he had done. Next Point - Jose Perdomo told police that Chapman has shot John. This assertion was not disclosed until about six years after Lennon's murder when Jim Gaines wrote an article about Chapman for People Magazine, on February 23, 1987, entitled, "The Man Who Shot Lennon." This article, however, did not mention Perdomo by name, it only referred to him as the doorman. It wasn't until the following month, on March 2, 1987, that Gaines finally released the identity of Jose Perdomo as the doorman. Here is an excerpt from "The Man Who Shot Lennon" (Feb. 23, 1987), by Jim Gaines, where Gaines describes how the "doorman" convinced NYPD patrolman Peter Cullen that Chapman was the assailant: Patrolman Peter Cullen of New York’s 20th precinct was in the first police car to respond to the report of shots fired at the Dakota apartment house at 72nd Street and Central Park West. … His first thought was that the handyman was the shooter. When the doorman indicated it was Chapman, Cullen’s instincts were offended. "He looked like a guy who worked in a bank, an office. Not a loser or anything, just a guy out there trying to earn a living. I remember taking a look at him and saying, ‘Why? What did you do here?’ He really had no answer for it. He did say several times, ‘I’m sorry I gave you guys so much trouble.’ "Next Point - Entry wounds on John's left side of the body. John's death certificate and autopsy report reveal that all four entry wounds were located on the left side of the body; however, Chapman was reportedly standing to Lennon's right and slightly behind him. Who was standing on Lennon's left? None other than Jose Perdomo the doorman. Next Point - Chapman's confession. False confessions are a common phenomenon which occur for a variety of reasons. Chapman's confession must be viewed within that context since forensic evidence indicates he is innocent. Because Chapman confessed, he was not given a trial. Instead he was given a sentencing hearing where the judge gave him twenty years to life at Attica State Prison in New York. How many red flags does it take to come to the conclusion that this wasn't a cut and dry murder by some crazy guy ?
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Aug 27, 2013 18:21:06 GMT -5
Yes and hopefully Yoko will do what Jackie Kennedy has done and she will make available information she knows about the assassination years after she has gone and perhaps Sean as well to protect him. All she knows is that she was walking and heard gunshots, and John was killed. Give us a break. You give us a break, the fact that Sean Lennon said the murder was a govt conspiracy means that Sean has discussed this with Yoko and he was brave enough to come out and say it.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 27, 2013 18:37:11 GMT -5
You give us a break, the fact that Sean Lennon said the murder was a govt conspiracy means that Sean has discussed this with Yoko and he was brave enough to come out and say it. All it means is that Sean really is as silly as his voice sounds! How the hell would Sean know anything? He's probably just another Conspiracy Theory Fanatic. he was just a 5-year-old kid when it happened, too. You weren't much older.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 27, 2013 18:47:44 GMT -5
Yes I have read countless accounts and nobody can state simply what happened from the time John stepped out of the limo to the time he was shot. Where was he standing ? Where was the shooter standing ? Who actually saw it ? Do you realize there was basically only the gunman, John, Yoko, and the doorman? Who would you expect to see anything? Jose the doorman saw plenty as it turned out. So did the killer, who has consistently retained his story. I read all the nonsense you've provided. It's an insult to the intelligence. I think you are a fanatic who gets off on "conspiracy theories". That kind of thing really excites people, who are always looking to find something that wasn't there. Maybe it's to fill a void in their lives, maybe it's because they need some fun and thrills. I don't know. You do all right at trying to debunk this and that -- now, how about telling us of a better suspect? Prove that someone other than Lennon's killer actually killed Lennon. Go ahead -- give us specifics, names.... times, places, reasons, motives. And then after you're done, tell us who the "real killer" is who killed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman. What possesses people like you to want to find other weird notions in open and shut cases like this?
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Aug 27, 2013 19:28:03 GMT -5
Yes I have read countless accounts and nobody can state simply what happened from the time John stepped out of the limo to the time he was shot. Where was he standing ? Where was the shooter standing ? Who actually saw it ? Do you realize there was basically only the gunman, John, Yoko, and the doorman? Who would you expect to see anything? Jose the doorman saw plenty as it turned out. So did the killer, who has consistently retained his story. I read all the nonsense you've provided. It's an insult to the intelligence. I think you are a fanatic who gets off on "conspiracy theories". That kind of thing really excites people, who are always looking to find something that wasn't there. Maybe it's to fill a void in their lives, maybe it's because they need some fun and thrills. I don't know. You do all right at trying to debunk this and that -- now, how about telling us of a better suspect? Prove that someone other than Lennon's killer actually killed Lennon. Go ahead -- give us specifics, names.... times, places, reasons, motives. And then after you're done, tell us who the "real killer" is who killed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman. What possesses people like you to want to find other weird notions in open and shut cases like this? If you go to youtube you can see footage of who killed JFK. It was the driver of the car and it is clearly visible, left arm over the right shoulder, real quick and unless you look for it you won't notice it. Jackie Kennedy scrambling at the back of the car was scared she was going to be shot as well. It's all there plain as day you just need to open your eyes. In the UK they're re-investigating the death of Diana with the possibility it was a conspiracy, most people at the time felt it was a conspiracy and not some accident, remember the white Fiat in the tunnel ? Still not found. So yeah I take everything I'm fed by the media with a grain of salt, the media is owned by large corporations that lend alot of monetary support to governments and there are vested and conflicted interests everywhere you look and these things happen for a reason.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 27, 2013 19:36:16 GMT -5
Ursa, That Guy That Shant Be Named was a nut who flew from Hawaii for the express purpose of killing Lennon. He bought the gun which was directly traced to the murder. He gave a detailed account of exactly how he did it. Which was verified by all the eye witness accounts and the physical evidence at the crime scene.
I'll probably regret this but could you give me a quick synopsis of what your conspiracy theory is?
|
|