|
Post by ursamajor on Apr 28, 2012 9:27:41 GMT -5
I didn't know he had a list of other celebrities to have a go at ! Somehow makes it seem even more senseless. Oh, it's definitely senseless (except to a confused mind). But yes, he had a list. I definitely recall that Johnny Carson was on it, I think Robert Goulet too... and Jackie Kennedy, Elizabeth Taylor and George C. Scott. It ultimately came down to John because the killer felt a strong connection with him and was angered by some things Lennon said, and came to think of John as a sell-out and a fraud. Besides, John was the easiest to get to. When I say no reason, I mean from the point the guy didn't even know him, therefore it's not as though John did something to this guy to set him off. Has there ever been an instance of a killer travelling halfway around the world to stalk his/her target and then kill the target ? If he wasn't made to look like a complete moron, loser then suspicions would be raised it was an inside job. The list doesn't mean much, if John was the target all along just skews the focus away from the government and that this guy was just a loose canon, I mean had he killed anyone before ? Who does this ? Even killers kill for a reason, drugs, money, survival etc .. I think you underestimate the power John had, John had power because he was a very famous guy, with alot of money who could create alot of attention, he was also very intelligent so he could make anyone look bad. So just because John was out of the limelight and baking bread doesn't mean he'd lost his moral sense. There is an interview with John from the early 70s and he accurately describes the reasons why governments go to war and although it was the early 70s it sounded like he was talking about Iraq. He was dangerous to the government IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 28, 2012 9:50:08 GMT -5
When I say no reason, I mean from the point the guy didn't even know him, therefore it's not as though John did something to this guy to set him off. Has there ever been an instance of a killer travelling halfway around the world to stalk his/her target and then kill the target ? Since when does a mentally confused person have to "personally know someone" to want him dead? That's what maniacs do. What difference does it make if this guy was the only one? Must it be required that there were any other similar examples? I damn well hope there weren't others! (However, I'm sure there'd have to be other examples in the police files of history). I just don't understand where your head is at on this. Following your own train of reasoning, how many other cases have there been where the government hires some ordinary nobody loser to travel halfway around the world to stalk and kill a target who isn't causing them any problem except making non-radical music and being a husband and dad?? Why is this so hard for you to fathom? The guy was mentally confused, screwed up. He was ill. What's the reason actress Rebecca Schaeffer was killed...? Why was Sharon Tate killed...? I have explained the reason(s) to you why John was killed (I mean "reasons" from the killer's warped perspective)... why do you disregard them? This screwed up individual had plenty of his own "reasons". How about providing one good reason for the government wanting Lennon killed? No, he was not - and that is a fact (never mind opinion). Jeez, they didn't even have John killed in the early-mid '70s when Nixon really DID fear him. He was eventually awarded a Green Card to live in the U.S.A. ... why in the world would you think the U.S. would suddenly fear him and want him dead? Especially when he was laid back and focused on family and making domestic music instead of championing causes? Ursa -- I know a guy at my job who is like you. I think there are some people that truly enjoy "controversy" and "conspiracy theories". It's like playing detective or unraveling some complex mystery. To them, nothing can ever be simply what it is. Lennon was murdered by a fan who was so depressed and mentally confused at that point of his life that he felt he would find his own identity and purpose in taking a big star down. He had a list of others, but became bonded with John because of many of his own warped reasons.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Apr 28, 2012 12:09:17 GMT -5
Back to the Lennon murder. I don't understand how the events don't "wash" with you. He did not go and kill John "for no reason" (I mean the guy had his own warped reasoning). The killer had an obsession with Lennon and was so mentally unstable and harboring an inferiority complex that he felt he "was a big nobody who wanted to be somebody". At the same time, he also resented John at times and felt he was "a phony" (the killer's favorite book, THE CATCHER IN THE RYE, also happened to be a about a crusade against people who were once innocent kids but grew into phony adults). In his mental state he felt that he wanted to kill Lennon and thus acquire his fame and notoriety. But it should be noted that the guy also had a list of OTHER celebrities he'd thought of killing instead... but for his own warped reasoning he ultimately centered on John when he came back into the public eye, and one of the recent articles on John also infuriated him. I don't say any of these reasons are "logical", of course... but what is so hard to conceive about a mentally sick person arriving at all sorts of bizarre decisions? And then making it his mission to travel to wherever his target is and kill him? There was that other killer who murdered actress Rebecca Schaffer... he went and traveled specifically to her apartment (where else is a person going to locate their target except by traveling to their location?). If you are familiar with all the personal history of Lennon's killer, or have read Jack Jones' very informative book LET ME TAKE YOU DOWN, it's all there. It's an extensive and twisted journey through the mind and thought process of John's killer. Once you've read it, everything is explained. I'm not saying the killer's logic makes sense, but I mean we learn what drove him. The thing that really doesn't "wash" or make sense is why you would think Lennon would still be considered some kind of government threat in 1980 when all he was doing was baking bread and playing daddy. He came out with a domestic DOUBLE FANTASY album that was all about marriage and real life, not politics looking to overthrow the government or anything. And with Jimmy Carter as president??? Are you kidding?? If you want to talk about "killing John for no reason", it was the government who had no reason to kill John Lennon. Joe, your summary above about the John Lennon murderer's motive or motivations is about the best and most objective I have ever read in such a short space. Good job. ursmajor, I respect your opinion even though I disagree with it. As a hotheaded 18 year old in late 1980, I was yelling that the government(s) did it just from my gut reaction and with a lot less information and thought than you have obviously put into it. I now think I was just trying to rationalize such a horrible thing to myself. To me John Lennon was the center of the universe and I thought that his murder must have come from Washington D.C., or London, or Moscow, or Havana, or Tehran, or the Vatican. The money issue is still curious to me. How did he finance this and didn't he buy some expensive, original artwork in the months leading up to this? Nonetheless, I think the man in Attica State did it by himself. Out of respect to my fellow posters I won't say the killer's name here although I totally disagree with the thought that it should never be mentioned. It means the killer is making me change my behavior for him and I hate that but I respect those who don't want it mentioned and I'll honor that in this Thread. In my role as "Mod," I would never tell a poster not to write out the killer's name if done in a way of historical reference or in rational discussion here. However, if done just to anger or hurt posters here, i.e., if a troll tried to take the killer's name as his/her posting name, I'd be the first on the "Batphone" to Steve! Just my quick editorial. But good job Joe and Ursamajor of expressing your differing opinions in a serious but respectful way and I say that as a fellow poster.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Apr 28, 2012 12:24:07 GMT -5
When I say no reason, I mean from the point the guy didn't even know him, therefore it's not as though John did something to this guy to set him off. Has there ever been an instance of a killer travelling halfway around the world to stalk his/her target and then kill the target ? Since when does a mentally confused person have to "personally know someone" to want him dead? That's what maniacs do. What difference does it make if this guy was the only one? Must it be required that there were any other similar examples? I damn well hope there weren't others! (However, I'm sure there'd have to be other examples in the police files of history). I just don't understand where your head is at on this. Following your own train of reasoning, how many other cases have there been where the government hires some ordinary nobody loser to travel halfway around the world to stalk and kill a target who isn't causing them any problem except making non-radical music and being a husband and dad?? Why is this so hard for you to fathom? The guy was mentally confused, screwed up. He was ill. What's the reason actress Rebecca Schaeffer was killed...? Why was Sharon Tate killed...? I have explained the reason(s) to you why John was killed (I mean "reasons" from the killer's warped perspective)... why do you disregard them? This screwed up individual had plenty of his own "reasons". How about providing one good reason for the government wanting Lennon killed? No, he was not - and that is a fact (never mind opinion). Jeez, they didn't even have John killed in the early-mid '70s when Nixon really DID fear him. He was eventually awarded a Green Card to live in the U.S.A. ... why in the world would you think the U.S. would suddenly fear him and want him dead? Especially when he was laid back and focused on family and making domestic music instead of championing causes? Ursa -- I know a guy at my job who is like you. I think there are some people that truly enjoy "controversy" and "conspiracy theories". It's like playing detective or unraveling some complex mystery. To them, nothing can ever be simply what it is. Lennon was murdered by a fan who was so depressed and mentally confused at that point of his life that he felt he would find his own identity and purpose in taking a big star down. He had a list of others, but became bonded with John because of many of his own warped reasons. so now we have three celebrities on the board: RTP: Paul McCartney (yeah right Paul-from Detroit?) Best of the Beatles: Pete Best ursamajor: Oliver Stone. just kiddin guys...except for RTP-you ARE the Paulrus!! ;D and Joe until I met you in person I thought you might have really been Yoko Ono.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 28, 2012 17:40:51 GMT -5
Joe, your summary above about the John Lennon murderer's motive or motivations is about the best and most objective I have ever read in such a short space. Good job. Thanks. I don't know about artwork. I think he used his wife's money, took it out of the account (I'm not positive about all the details). He bought a gun and hallow point bullets. In case anyone doesn't know, he first went to NY to kill John in October... but he went to see the movie ORDINARY PEOPLE (I think it was) and it changed his mind somehow. He went back to his wife in Hawaii and told her what he had intended to do, but said "your love has saved me". Then he tried to assure her that he really COULD have done it. By December he'd lost the battle with his personal demons again... Thanks, but I'm thinking it's just a suggestion. Of course individuals ought to be able to refer to him in their own way. For me, I just don't like mentioning him. But I'm surprised nobody's brought something up, so I'll go out on a limb and do so. For somebody like me who doesn't want to give this jerk so much attention, maybe some have noticed I have read the Jack Jones book (the jerk does not profit by it) and I have every TV interview I can find with the killer. As tragic as this event was, it is still vital Beatles history. I'm surprised nobody's said "Joe, you are giving him more support than anyone else". Well, I would say I'm not "supporting" him.... that is, he doesn't know I'm looking into him and his case. I am somehow intrigued with the whole drama of this awful crime as well as I am hurt and horrified by it. I think it's because I loved Lennon, thus I want to know what happened and how. I am very interested in what made his killer do it... maybe to also try and make some kind of sense of it (which never works; it's always just senseless). But any of those "serial killer" shows that come up on TV ... I just find myself wanting to try and learn more. After all, there are people who make their living studying sick criminals (though I don't!). In THIS particular case the only reason I try to learn the details is because the victim was John Lennon, sadly. Maybe it's also partly because I am a New Yorker. Anyway - I cannot mention the Jack Jones book enough. It's the absolute single best source out there for trying to get all the details and trying to get some kind of understanding or closure. Not saying that anything ever makes this act any easier to bear.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 28, 2012 17:53:47 GMT -5
and Joe until I met you in person I thought you might have really been Yoko Ono. I can understand why! But actually, Yoko's better than me about this. She doesn't ever seem to care and allows people to say what they want about her without feeling the need to always defend herself.
|
|