|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Nov 30, 2010 6:11:08 GMT -5
Upon hearing the gunshots, he approached the killer, shook the gun from his hand, Correct. And I don't know how I forgot about this when I wrote my last post to Ursa, as I have replayed this tragic scenario in my mind over and over for the past 30 years. Jose also had tears in his eyes and just kept yelling at the killer: "Get out of here!! Just get out of here!!!", and the shooter asked: "But where would I go...?" Right to the point. Beautiful. Well said. And I would just like to add that this did not just haoppen in 2008... he has described these events consistently and clearly over and over, even from the 1980s, 1990s, and beyond.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 30, 2010 12:45:24 GMT -5
For those of you who wish to hear once more John's killer speak about the events of Dec. 8, 1980, as well as his wife's comments, CNN Domestic is airing a special this Saturday and Sunday at 8PM ET in North America. I am not sure if it will air Internationally, but you can check CNN's website to see. Unfortunately the program once more thrusts the killer's name and deed into the spotlight, exactly what he craved thirty years ago when he committed the crime. But if it presents thefacts accurately, perhaps more young people, who weren't even alive thirty years ago, but are fans of John Lennon and The Beatles will be allowed to see and hear what REALLY transpired and we can get away from all these conspiracy theories that seem to still abound. I just hope the man who currently rots in Attica will not be told of, or allowed to see the program which would once more flatter his sick ego. BTW; the special interviews the NYC police officer who held John, as he passed away, in his arms in the back of the police car as they raced him to Roosevelt Hospital. It is still quite an emotional moment for the retired officer as he recollects the event, and for the viewer watching. us.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2010/11/30/exp.am.lennon.crime.scene.cnn?hpt=C2
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 30, 2010 13:06:54 GMT -5
I also get just as mad that his wife pops off to the media. I think that she had to have had an idea of what he was on about in late 1980 but was a complete doormat and kept silent. Maybe she was a victim of domestic violence and for that I feel bad but didn't she run back to him as much as she could to a guy in prison? I've read she gets 44 hour conjugal visits at least once a year in a "homelike" setting. That's better than Yoko gets. . I wish she would fall off the face of the planet too.
|
|
cosmo
Very Clean
Posts: 264
|
Post by cosmo on Nov 30, 2010 16:58:12 GMT -5
I also found it very moving when Yoko asked at the end of the documentary - He was an artist. Why would anyone want to shoot him?
I don't believe there was any kind of conspiracy - all the work of the ahole who claimed responsibility. I bought that LIFE publication on John (recently put out) and was incensed to see his picture in it. I cut it out and threw it in the kitchen garbage.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 30, 2010 20:17:11 GMT -5
I also found it very moving when Yoko asked at the end of the documentary - He was an artist. Why would anyone want to shoot him? I don't believe there was any kind of conspiracy - all the work of the ahole who claimed responsibility. I bought that LIFE publication on John (recently put out) and was incensed to see his picture in it. I cut it out and threw it in the kitchen garbage. Thanks Cosmo. Wish more fans would do the same.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Nov 30, 2010 20:24:18 GMT -5
I think it's quite obvious that John Lennon was shot as a plot to silence him and not by some deranged nobody. Since you brought it up, let's talk about Jose Pedromo.
Jose Perdomo was the doorman at the Dakota on Dec. 8, 1980, the night Lennon was killed.
Jose Perdomo was at the crime scene when the murder occurred.
Jose Perdomo asked accused assassin Mark David Chapman, immediately after the shooting, if he knew what he had just done. Chapman replied that he had just shot John Lennon.
Jose Perdomo told police Chapman was Lennon's assailant. One of the arresting officers, Peter Cullen, did not believe Chapman shot Lennon. Cullen believed the shooter was a handyman at the Dakota, but Perdomo convinced Cullen it was Chapman. Cullen thought Chapman "looked like a guy who worked in a bank."
Jose Perdomo was an anti-Castro Cuban exile. Perdomo and Chapman discussed the Bay of Pigs Invasion and JFK's assassination a few hours before Lennon was killed. This suggests Perdomo was a member of Brigade 2506 during the Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961, a failed CIA operation to overthrow Fidel Castro.
Cuban Information Archives reveal a "Jose Joaquin Sanjenis Perdomo" (aliases: Joaquin Sanjenis, Sam Jenis) was a member of Brigade 2506 during the Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961.
Joaquin Sanjenis worked closely with convicted Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis (deceased) for about ten years on the CIA's payroll.
Frank Sturgis claimed Joaquin Sanjenis died of natural causes in 1974; however, this was never confirmed by any other source. According to Sturgis, the CIA nurtured Sanjenis's anonymity and his family was not notified of his alleged death until after the funeral. Sanjenis may still be alive.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Nov 30, 2010 20:33:14 GMT -5
Well we will never know, MDC always maintained he was innocent and did not shoot John and pleaded not guilty. At the very last minute he changed his plea to guilty so an investigation into John's death was never officially conducted. It was considered and open and shut case based entirely on MDC changing his plea at the last minute. The autopsy report on John has never been released. The NY Times changed their story from one day to the next as to where MDC was allegedly standing when he shot John. The two police officers that arrived on the scene did not think that MDC was the killer. The doorman, Jose Perdomo, saw the killer standing outside in the shadows. Upon hearing the gunshots, he approached the killer, shook the gun from his hand, and asked him "Do you know what you've done?" And the killer replied "Yes, I just shot John Lennon." He then sat down with the copy of the Salinger book in his hand and waited for the police. The first police on the scene arrived to see him just sitting there with only the book in his hand, not the gun, so of course they thought he was not the killer. The accused always maintained he had shot Lennon. The gun had his prints on it. His lawyers wanted him to plead not guilty to give him an insanity defense, but he chose to plead guilty. Of course he did, he wanted the credit and notariety of the crime. There is absolutely no evidence of a conspiracy or of the killer being a government agent. The man was an idiot, and a loser, who had a fascination with John Lennon and a desire to do something that would make him feel important to society, much like the character in Salinger's book "Catcher in the Rye" which seemed to "inspire" the shooting. End of story. Perhaps we can "inspire" Oliver Stone to do a movie version of the shooting and make it look like the government was behind the incident. He loves to change history in his movies so subsequent generations get the wrong impression of what really happened at a momentous event in history. Until that happens, we'll just have to accept what really happened and the evidence which backs it up.......Not imagine what could have happened if we distort the facts. www.scribd.com/doc/4895151/Mark-David-Chapman-Parole-TranscriptAbove is a website that contains the transcript of the killer's 2008 parole hearing in which he describes the event of Dec. 1980 as he remembers them. You might want to read the transcript. My apologies to John's family and all Beatlefans that the name of the killer appears in the website address. The problem with this post is that it is difficult to criticize the official explanation of what happened to John Lennon because a universally accepted version does not exist. There was no trial, no testimonies, no witnesses. The police report was certainly of little value and the autopsy report is suppressed from public view. Most of the public's perception of Chapman is hocus-pocus nonsense, half-truths, media spin, and the power of suggestion. A patsy was needed to take the blame for murdering Lennon, so Chapman was set up to take the fall.
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Nov 30, 2010 21:41:18 GMT -5
Perdomo and Chapman discussed the Bay of Pigs Invasion and JFK's assassination a few hours before Lennon was killed. Your source for this....?
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Dec 1, 2010 5:47:32 GMT -5
I also get just as mad that his wife pops off to the media. I think that she had to have had an idea of what he was on about in late 1980 but was a complete doormat and kept silent. Maybe she was a victim of domestic violence and for that I feel bad but didn't she run back to him as much as she could to a guy in prison? I've read she gets 44 hour conjugal visits at least once a year in a "homelike" setting. That's better than Yoko gets. . I wish she would fall off the face of the planet too. The worm actually called his wife and told her what he intended to do. Had she have contacted authorities we might still have our hero and more importantly his family and friends would still have him.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 1, 2010 6:24:35 GMT -5
The problem with this post is that it is difficult to criticize the official explanation of what happened to John Lennon because a universally accepted version does not exist. Yes, a universally accepted version DOES exist, by everyone on the planet except for yourself and perhaps a scattered amount of other "conspiracy thrill seekers". That universally accepted version is the truth - that this disturbed individual murdered John Lennon. There most certainly were witnesses. Jose the doorman and Yoko Ono, for two. There was no trial because this nut plead guilty to gain the attention he so craved. That's a laugh to read you say this, after the magic tricks you're coming up with! Please answer this question -- do you believe there was someone else present who shot John, and that this guy did not pull the trigger? "Obvious"? That's way out there. No, it is not obvious. Not in the slightest. John's murder may have been more questionable in the early 70s, when Lennon was at his most radical under the Nixon administration, as I said earlier -- but not in 1980 when he was a househusband promoting family. Why do you have such a need to believe something so extreme and controversial? Right. Because Jose had seen it occur, and asked this lunatic if he'd realized what he'd just done. So what? Since when did killers have to fit some type of required physical description? What do you even mean here? This "suggests"...? "Suggests"...? It doesn't suggest a damn thing, and it's not even known if they did discuss these things. And even if they DID, it has no bearing whatsoever on anything. So the killer was a maniac who may have brought up these topics -- so what? Everyone who ran into the murderer inthe hours and days before he killed John said he came up with some odd things to discuss, and seemed strange. And I will add that I think it's extremely disrespectful of you to mention this killer's name constantly in this type of discussion. You are providing him with the very notoriety he wanted, and it's an insult to John Lennon. Especially when it's now only mere days away from the 30th Anniversary of that horrific night. The one that I and so many older people like me recall better than you. And particulalry because I lived in NY and caught each step of the news as it unfolded. And there was no other mysterious shooter or government plot. This is all crapola that you types start to play with and theorize up and fatasize about well after the facts.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Dec 1, 2010 6:31:53 GMT -5
I reckon it was just one person who did JFK, Martin Luthor King, Lennon and Princess Di. Also he fried the Mars bars for Elvis and runs an employment agency for patsies.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 1, 2010 11:08:25 GMT -5
Okay, I just encountered a second Lennon fan who was turned off of John by this documentary! The mailman who delivers mail to my office is more of a Lennon fan than my songwriting friend and he knew of most of John's transgressions yet he said this documentary does too good of a job in showing what a jerk John could be to everyone: wife, ex-wife, sons, father, friends, fellow musicians, waitresses, etc.
He said if this documentary was a closing argument in a lawsuit(a summation of the evidence just heard) against John Lennon, then he'd award the Plaintiff a million dollars against John.
I must admit to catching much but not all of this documentary as I was preparing for our hosting Thanksgiving. I thought that it was okay but I need to see it again as two people whose opinions I respect walked away with a worse opinion of John than a better one.
I am not saying they are wrong or right but that this is how they each feel(and they don't know each other) after watching this.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Dec 1, 2010 12:45:21 GMT -5
I think it's quite obvious that John Lennon was shot as a plot to silence him and not by some deranged nobody. Since you brought it up, let's talk about Jose Pedromo. Jose Perdomo was the doorman at the Dakota on Dec. 8, 1980, the night Lennon was killed. Jose Perdomo was at the crime scene when the murder occurred. Jose Perdomo asked accused assassin Mark David Chapman, immediately after the shooting, if he knew what he had just done. Chapman replied that he had just shot John Lennon. Jose Perdomo told police Chapman was Lennon's assailant. One of the arresting officers, Peter Cullen, did not believe Chapman shot Lennon. Cullen believed the shooter was a handyman at the Dakota, but Perdomo convinced Cullen it was Chapman. Cullen thought Chapman "looked like a guy who worked in a bank." Jose Perdomo was an anti-Castro Cuban exile. Perdomo and Chapman discussed the Bay of Pigs Invasion and JFK's assassination a few hours before Lennon was killed. This suggests Perdomo was a member of Brigade 2506 during the Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961, a failed CIA operation to overthrow Fidel Castro. Cuban Information Archives reveal a "Jose Joaquin Sanjenis Perdomo" (aliases: Joaquin Sanjenis, Sam Jenis) was a member of Brigade 2506 during the Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961. Joaquin Sanjenis worked closely with convicted Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis (deceased) for about ten years on the CIA's payroll. Frank Sturgis claimed Joaquin Sanjenis died of natural causes in 1974; however, this was never confirmed by any other source. According to Sturgis, the CIA nurtured Sanjenis's anonymity and his family was not notified of his alleged death until after the funeral. Sanjenis may still be alive. Believe what you choose to believe. But when people ask you about the murder, make sure you refer them to the true historical facts that are available at many sources rather than the fictitious statements you have decided to accept to fit your beliefs. You might want to contact Oliver Stone however. He loves making up fiction stories to turn into movies about real historical moments. He might engage you to write a screenplay based on your ideas and you could make a few bucks off this! BTW; was George Harrison's attacker in 1999 a government agent too? Did George really die from Cancer??? Maybe they're out to get all The Beatles! Remember the movie HELP?? ;D
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Dec 1, 2010 12:51:22 GMT -5
Okay, I just encountered a second Lennon fan who was turned off of John by this documentary! The mailman who delivers mail to my office is more of a Lennon fan than my songwriting friend and he knew of most of John's transgressions yet he said this documentary does too good of a job in showing what a jerk John could be to everyone: wife, ex-wife, sons, father, friends, fellow musicians, waitresses, etc. He said if this documentary was a closing argument in a lawsuit(a summation of the evidence just heard) against John Lennon, then he'd award the Plaintiff a million dollars against John. I must admit to catching much but not all of this documentary as I was preparing for our hosting Thanksgiving. I thought that it was okay but I need to see it again as two people whose opinions I respect walked away with a worse opinion of John than a better one. I am not saying they are wrong or right but that this is how they each feel(and they don't know each other) after watching this. You know, I can see how some people were given a negative impression of John by this documentary. It does not surprise me that you are hearing such comments. Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 1, 2010 12:58:58 GMT -5
I also get just as mad that his wife pops off to the media. I think that she had to have had an idea of what he was on about in late 1980 but was a complete doormat and kept silent. Maybe she was a victim of domestic violence and for that I feel bad but didn't she run back to him as much as she could to a guy in prison? I've read she gets 44 hour conjugal visits at least once a year in a "homelike" setting. That's better than Yoko gets. . I wish she would fall off the face of the planet too. The worm actually called his wife and told her what he intended to do. Had she have contacted authorities we might still have our hero and more importantly his family and friends would still have him. What!? He told her his intentions before the fact and she did nothing? In the back of my mind I remember her knowing that he was distraught and that he went to NYC. I don't know if I ever knew she was told her husband's evil intentions and did nothing!
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Dec 1, 2010 13:36:58 GMT -5
I think it's quite obvious that John Lennon was shot as a plot to silence him and not by some deranged nobody. Since you brought it up, let's talk about Jose Pedromo. Jose Perdomo was the doorman at the Dakota on Dec. 8, 1980, the night Lennon was killed. Jose Perdomo was at the crime scene when the murder occurred. Jose Perdomo asked accused assassin Mark David Chapman, immediately after the shooting, if he knew what he had just done. Chapman replied that he had just shot John Lennon. Jose Perdomo told police Chapman was Lennon's assailant. One of the arresting officers, Peter Cullen, did not believe Chapman shot Lennon. Cullen believed the shooter was a handyman at the Dakota, but Perdomo convinced Cullen it was Chapman. Cullen thought Chapman "looked like a guy who worked in a bank." Jose Perdomo was an anti-Castro Cuban exile. Perdomo and Chapman discussed the Bay of Pigs Invasion and JFK's assassination a few hours before Lennon was killed. This suggests Perdomo was a member of Brigade 2506 during the Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961, a failed CIA operation to overthrow Fidel Castro. Cuban Information Archives reveal a "Jose Joaquin Sanjenis Perdomo" (aliases: Joaquin Sanjenis, Sam Jenis) was a member of Brigade 2506 during the Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961. Joaquin Sanjenis worked closely with convicted Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis (deceased) for about ten years on the CIA's payroll. Frank Sturgis claimed Joaquin Sanjenis died of natural causes in 1974; however, this was never confirmed by any other source. According to Sturgis, the CIA nurtured Sanjenis's anonymity and his family was not notified of his alleged death until after the funeral. Sanjenis may still be alive. Believe what you choose to believe. But when people ask you about the murder, make sure you refer them to the true historical facts that are available at many sources rather than the fictitious statements you have decided to accept to fit your beliefs. You might want to contact Oliver Stone however. He loves making up fiction stories to turn into movies about real historical moments. He might engage you to write a screenplay based on your ideas and you could make a few bucks off this! BTW; was George Harrison's attacker in 1999 a government agent too? Did George really die from Cancer??? Maybe they're out to get all The Beatles! Remember the movie HELP?? ;D "Go to the window!!!!!! Go to the Window!!!!!!" ;D Actually...Paul did it- the real Paul...not the William Campbell version who is the biological father of Mary, and Heather. (James, though is his real son, when Linda mistook the real Paul for her husband (Campbell) during a trip to Kalambaka, Greece, where the real Paul was in hiding. He did it because John was bragging about how great William Campbell's new album was doing. He has since gone back into hiding, though some say he is Emmitt Rhodes.... ...but....I digress....
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 1, 2010 16:44:25 GMT -5
I think it's quite obvious that John Lennon was shot as a plot to silence him and not by some deranged nobody. Since you brought it up, let's talk about Jose Pedromo. Jose Perdomo was the doorman at the Dakota on Dec. 8, 1980, the night Lennon was killed. Jose Perdomo was at the crime scene when the murder occurred. Jose Perdomo asked accused assassin Mark David Chapman, immediately after the shooting, if he knew what he had just done. Chapman replied that he had just shot John Lennon. Jose Perdomo told police Chapman was Lennon's assailant. One of the arresting officers, Peter Cullen, did not believe Chapman shot Lennon. Cullen believed the shooter was a handyman at the Dakota, but Perdomo convinced Cullen it was Chapman. Cullen thought Chapman "looked like a guy who worked in a bank." Jose Perdomo was an anti-Castro Cuban exile. Perdomo and Chapman discussed the Bay of Pigs Invasion and JFK's assassination a few hours before Lennon was killed. This suggests Perdomo was a member of Brigade 2506 during the Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961, a failed CIA operation to overthrow Fidel Castro. Cuban Information Archives reveal a "Jose Joaquin Sanjenis Perdomo" (aliases: Joaquin Sanjenis, Sam Jenis) was a member of Brigade 2506 during the Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961. Joaquin Sanjenis worked closely with convicted Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis (deceased) for about ten years on the CIA's payroll. Frank Sturgis claimed Joaquin Sanjenis died of natural causes in 1974; however, this was never confirmed by any other source. According to Sturgis, the CIA nurtured Sanjenis's anonymity and his family was not notified of his alleged death until after the funeral. Sanjenis may still be alive. Believe what you choose to believe. But when people ask you about the murder, make sure you refer them to the true historical facts that are available at many sources rather than the fictitious statements you have decided to accept to fit your beliefs. You might want to contact Oliver Stone however. He loves making up fiction stories to turn into movies about real historical moments. He might engage you to write a screenplay based on your ideas and you could make a few bucks off this! BTW; was George Harrison's attacker in 1999 a government agent too? Did George really die from Cancer??? Maybe they're out to get all The Beatles! Remember the movie HELP?? ;D Hey lowbasso you're the one who brought up Jose Pedromo. As a true John fan I have done my research and guess what ? Perdomo's name was not publicly disclosed until over six years after Lennon's murder. (NOTE: If someone knows of an article or book about the murder, published prior to 1987, which mentions Jose Perdomo by name, please feel free to point me to that information.) Surprisingly, 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, a member of the Beatles's management team, Peter Brown, 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. So lowbasso, please point me to your facts about what happened on the night ? What did Yoko see ? Where was she standing ? Where was MDC standing when he allegedly shot John ? Where was John standing ? What did the bullets hit ? What was the angle ? There was only one "witness" , Sean Strubb which has been proven to be fake. Do yourself a favour and check it out, otherwise I can point you to this information.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Dec 1, 2010 19:06:42 GMT -5
Believe what you choose to believe. But when people ask you about the murder, make sure you refer them to the true historical facts that are available at many sources rather than the fictitious statements you have decided to accept to fit your beliefs. You might want to contact Oliver Stone however. He loves making up fiction stories to turn into movies about real historical moments. He might engage you to write a screenplay based on your ideas and you could make a few bucks off this! BTW; was George Harrison's attacker in 1999 a government agent too? Did George really die from Cancer??? Maybe they're out to get all The Beatles! Remember the movie HELP?? ;D Hey lowbasso you're the one who brought up Jose Pedromo. As a true John fan I have done my research and guess what ? Perdomo's name was not publicly disclosed until over six years after Lennon's murder. (NOTE: If someone knows of an article or book about the murder, published prior to 1987, which mentions Jose Perdomo by name, please feel free to point me to that information.) Surprisingly, 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, a member of the Beatles's management team, Peter Brown, 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. So lowbasso, please point me to your facts about what happened on the night ? What did Yoko see ? Where was she standing ? Where was MDC standing when he allegedly shot John ? Where was John standing ? What did the bullets hit ? What was the angle ? There was only one "witness" , Sean Strubb which has been proven to be fake. Do yourself a favour and check it out, otherwise I can point you to this information. I'm done discussing this subject with you. If you want to know what happened do the research yourself. I am sure our moderator, Steve, will be happy to steer you to everything written on the subject. He is a journalist. I also posted earlier on this thread a link to the killer's 2008 Parole Board hearing where he discusses once more what happened that night. This is a morbid subject and I've had my fill of arguing over the event. If you want to believe it was a conspiracy, be my guest. The facts prove otherwise, so I don't feel any further motivation to try and change your mind. Life's too short my friend. Best Wishes!
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Dec 1, 2010 19:29:00 GMT -5
Believe what you choose to believe. But when people ask you about the murder, make sure you refer them to the true historical facts that are available at many sources rather than the fictitious statements you have decided to accept to fit your beliefs. You might want to contact Oliver Stone however. He loves making up fiction stories to turn into movies about real historical moments. He might engage you to write a screenplay based on your ideas and you could make a few bucks off this! BTW; was George Harrison's attacker in 1999 a government agent too? Did George really die from Cancer??? Maybe they're out to get all The Beatles! Remember the movie HELP?? ;D "Go to the window!!!!!! Go to the Window!!!!!!" ;D Actually...Paul did it- the real Paul...not the William Campbell version who is the biological father of Mary, and Heather. (James, though is his real son, when Linda mistook the real Paul for her husband (Campbell) during a trip to Kalambaka, Greece, where the real Paul was in hiding. He did it because John was bragging about how great William Campbell's new album was doing. He has since gone back into hiding, though some say he is Emmitt Rhodes.... ...but....I digress.... "Boys, are you buzzing?" ;D
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Dec 1, 2010 19:33:00 GMT -5
The worm actually called his wife and told her what he intended to do. Had she have contacted authorities we might still have our hero and more importantly his family and friends would still have him. What!? He told her his intentions before the fact and she did nothing? In the back of my mind I remember her knowing that he was distraught and that he went to NYC. I don't know if I ever knew she was told her husband's evil intentions and did nothing! He did tell her. I believe it will be in the CNN story to air this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 1, 2010 23:13:39 GMT -5
Hey lowbasso you're the one who brought up Jose Pedromo. As a true John fan I have done my research and guess what ? Perdomo's name was not publicly disclosed until over six years after Lennon's murder. (NOTE: If someone knows of an article or book about the murder, published prior to 1987, which mentions Jose Perdomo by name, please feel free to point me to that information.) Surprisingly, 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, a member of the Beatles's management team, Peter Brown, 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. So lowbasso, please point me to your facts about what happened on the night ? What did Yoko see ? Where was she standing ? Where was MDC standing when he allegedly shot John ? Where was John standing ? What did the bullets hit ? What was the angle ? There was only one "witness" , Sean Strubb which has been proven to be fake. Do yourself a favour and check it out, otherwise I can point you to this information. I'm done discussing this subject with you. If you want to know what happened do the research yourself. I am sure our moderator, Steve, will be happy to steer you to everything written on the subject. He is a journalist. I also posted earlier on this thread a link to the killer's 2008 Parole Board hearing where he discusses once more what happened that night. This is a morbid subject and I've had my fill of arguing over the event. If you want to believe it was a conspiracy, be my guest. The facts prove otherwise, so I don't feel any further motivation to try and change your mind. Life's too short my friend. Best Wishes! You're done ? What have you actually discussed apart from trying to insult me just because you can't fathom the idea that John's death was a setup. You have no clue what you are talking about in regards to this case so please spare me the macho talk. Mark David Chapman has never been declared insane by the state of New York or any other governmental body, not at the federal level, not at the state level, and not at the local level. On June 22, 1981, Chapman was given a competency hearing where it was determined that he was not legally insane, and as a consequence, he was sentenced twenty years to life at Attica State Prison. I'm done with discussing this topic as well. Best wishes and good luck.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 2, 2010 0:32:58 GMT -5
What!? He told her his intentions before the fact and she did nothing? In the back of my mind I remember her knowing that he was distraught and that he went to NYC. I don't know if I ever knew she was told her husband's evil intentions and did nothing! He did tell her. I believe it will be in the CNN story to air this weekend. Well I would then hold her just as responsible as him. Maybe she should pay! In Islamic law, Yoko would be allowed to personally kill her. Iran just hung a woman who is said to have killed her lover's wife. The murdered wife's brother was allowed to kick the chair out of the condemmed woman's feet. Maybe Yoko should be allowed to put four bullets into each of these two losers! Let Mark and Gloria burn in Hell!
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Dec 2, 2010 3:22:17 GMT -5
Okay, I just encountered a second Lennon fan who was turned off of John by this documentary! The mailman who delivers mail to my office is more of a Lennon fan than my songwriting friend and he knew of most of John's transgressions yet he said this documentary does too good of a job in showing what a jerk John could be to everyone: wife, ex-wife, sons, father, friends, fellow musicians, waitresses, etc. He said if this documentary was a closing argument in a lawsuit(a summation of the evidence just heard) against John Lennon, then he'd award the Plaintiff a million dollars against John. I must admit to catching much but not all of this documentary as I was preparing for our hosting Thanksgiving. I thought that it was okay but I need to see it again as two people whose opinions I respect walked away with a worse opinion of John than a better one. I am not saying they are wrong or right but that this is how they each feel(and they don't know each other) after watching this. We've got another Lennon show on the tellie this Sunday.... Lennon Naked.... I've seen the ads and once more there's a dude in a silly wig... (though this dude was a doctor)... It might be quite funny. The John and Yoko a Love Story was a giggle and I'm expecting this to be along similar lines. I think some folk would be turned off JL from these two 'films'....
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 2, 2010 6:40:12 GMT -5
You're done ? What have you actually discussed apart from trying to insult me just because you can't fathom the idea that John's death was a setup. I'm done with discussing this topic as well. Like you said - it is just an "idea" that it was a setup. And a very silly one. That makes three of us who are done with this discussion, and that's partly because you've elected to ignore my posts and questions. Also because you deliberately and defiantly put that loser's name in full, bold letters, just to be an ass about it. Looks like you're a big fan and supporter of his --- maybe you really aren't as young as you claim, and YOU killed John Lennon on 12/8/80. If you did not actually murder John, thanks for giving the 'Catcher In The Rye' more attention and notoriety only 6 days away from the 30th Anniversary of his crime. Shame on you.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 2, 2010 6:50:17 GMT -5
Okay, I just encountered a second Lennon fan who was turned off of John by this documentary! The mailman who delivers mail to my office is more of a Lennon fan than my songwriting friend and he knew of most of John's transgressions yet he said this documentary does too good of a job in showing what a jerk John could be to everyone: wife, ex-wife, sons, father, friends, fellow musicians, waitresses, etc. He said if this documentary was a closing argument in a lawsuit(a summation of the evidence just heard) against John Lennon, then he'd award the Plaintiff a million dollars against John. I must admit to catching much but not all of this documentary as I was preparing for our hosting Thanksgiving. I thought that it was okay but I need to see it again as two people whose opinions I respect walked away with a worse opinion of John than a better one. I am not saying they are wrong or right but that this is how they each feel(and they don't know each other) after watching this. You know, I can see how some people were given a negative impression of John by this documentary. It does not surprise me that you are hearing such comments. Interesting. I watched it a second time last night with a friend. And this time I was particularly looking to see if it gave off some kind of "unlikable vibe" toward John. I just didn't sense that at all. On the contrary, he seemed most likable and down to Earth, except that he was a rotten drunk when he would indulge, and he did take that girl into the bedroom in front of Yoko. We all make mistakes, we all may do bad or insensitive things at one time or another in our lives which we feel sorry about and later apologize for. People are allowed to walk away from this documentary feeling "negatively" about John, but I personally just cannot see how, in the overall picture. Last night I felt so sad at the end, again realizing this wonderfully unique, one-of-a-kind and very special individual who intrigued so many is no longer with us. (And if RTP is reading, I have to say I again was reminded just how bland Paul McCartney is in comparison).
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 2, 2010 18:18:14 GMT -5
You're done ? What have you actually discussed apart from trying to insult me just because you can't fathom the idea that John's death was a setup. I'm done with discussing this topic as well. Like you said - it is just an "idea" that it was a setup. And a very silly one. That makes three of us who are done with this discussion, and that's partly because you've elected to ignore my posts and questions. Also because you deliberately and defiantly put that loser's name in full, bold letters, just to be an ass about it. Looks like you're a big fan and supporter of his --- maybe you really aren't as young as you claim, and YOU killed John Lennon on 12/8/80. If you did not actually murder John, thanks for giving the 'Catcher In The Rye' more attention and notoriety only 6 days away from the 30th Anniversary of his crime. Shame on you. I've answered your questions before, in any case you addressed me in a condescending and insulting way so you did not deserve a response from me, also accept that there are many books written about this subject alone, not just one or two, many. Have a nice day !
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Dec 3, 2010 4:35:50 GMT -5
Someone on a comics board I go to has just posted about seeing the Lennon documentary with a friend who said afterwards, "Wow! Never realised what an unpleasant man he was."
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 3, 2010 6:25:55 GMT -5
I've answered your questions before, in any case you addressed me in a condescending and insulting way so you did not deserve a response from me And your idiotic ideas about John being brought down by the government really didn't deserve a reponse from me or anyone else either, except to say they we thought they were idiotic ideas. So be thankful anyone even bothered addressing your nonsense. Plus, you are the one who continually insulted John by going out of your way to mention his killer's name, and thus giving him all he loves and craves. Yeah. Everyone's out to make a buck with expolitive make-believe garbage. Whether it's about JFK or JL, it all proves nothing except that there are conspiracy thrill-seekers out there to sell to. Don't be disingenuous with me. I don't believe you truly care what kind of day I have, and that you'd probably hope it wasn't a good one.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 3, 2010 6:40:07 GMT -5
Someone on a comics board I go to has just posted about seeing the Lennon documentary with a friend who said afterwards, "Wow! Never realised what an unpleasant man he was." I know you're talking about someone else, but I am really surprised people would get this impression from this doc. Unless they're reacting to John's "Lost Weekend" segment of drunken callousness (and had never heard about it before), I can't imagine what else there is in the doc that displays such a feeling. For the most part they have John helping people like John Sinclair out, doing his "peace movement" activities, helping the plight of women, making good on a bet with friend Elton John, and then settling down with a househusband life with Yoko and Sean. There's of course the time he took the girl into the other room in front of Yoko, but as I said elsewhere it was a one-time drunken mistake, and the film then goes on to show the photos of John on his knees begging Yoko's forgiveness, amidst the beautiful song lyrics to AISUMASEN, where he apologizes profusely... "I'm sorry, Yoko". If anything, there was much more unpleasantness from John in other docs where he performs the vicious HOW DO YOU SLEEP?, as well as yelling and cussing at the engineer who cannot access the proper verse of OH YOKO... and all the fights he gets into with reporters Al Kapp and whatever else! So, the movie IMAGINE: JOHN LENNON (1988) is much more "negative" with regard to John's unpleasant side, and yet nobody said anything about that one (LOL! ;D ). Bah .... The more I consider this, I think people are just jumping on some sort of bandwagon. And just trying to undermine John again. I guess RTP's influence has taken some hold. This notion that LENNONYC is so "unpleasant" -- especially when compared to previous films about John where he was far worse -- is just greatly exaggerated. But at any rate, at least this film makes Yoko look better to many people, which they have commented on. At this point that is what's important; hell, we always knew John was human with flaws. Meanwhile, we have a pretender like Paulie who tries to paint himself as such a straight, good guy. I can only imagine the horror stories in his closet!
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 3, 2010 9:53:34 GMT -5
Someone on a comics board I go to has just posted about seeing the Lennon documentary with a friend who said afterwards, "Wow! Never realised what an unpleasant man he was." That is consistent with the two people I know in my small town who took the time to watch this on PBS. Most other of my acquaintances would have skipped right over it not being fans. Maybe this documentary was aimed at us more invested Lennon fans, invested meaning those of us who have bought the music, read the books and articles, know more than the casual fan about John's history. These things revealed about John don't upset me because I have read about them for years. I think John himself regretted, after the fact, all of that complained of conduct but that was his nature: very impulsive and explosive. I was just noting my surprise at reactions to this film by two people I know who have a more than passing interest in John Lennon but certainly not the investment in John that we here have all made.
|
|