# Jimi Hendrix Was Murdered **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 19, 2010, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578 "2010-01-19T17:22:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/221 "2010-02-07T03:19:18Z")
And so castles made of sand, fall in the sea, eventually. ---
**Author:** ![Noel\_Prosequi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b19c9b/32.png) [@Noel\_Prosequi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Noel_Prosequi)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/222 "2010-02-07T03:40:11Z")
As with all these debates, this is becoming dully repetitious. Circular argument: > [@](#): > > I guess the answer to your question about how much I know about criminal detection is “enough to make you so brazenly dodge the evidence as you do in this thread.” Appeal to imaginary authority: > [@](#): > > I’m sure most serious readers of this… > > But anyone reading this can see… > > …that most people would see are impossible to deny… > > Any expert would laugh you out of court… > > This would be bourne out by experts… He repeats arguments long addressed and dealt with - > [@](#): > > You’re simply WRONG here and the absorption rate will prove to be reliable and determinable in the context I present. “Did too. Did not.” The only way to resolve what is a critical part of your argument is to point to _evidence_ of this. You still don’t get that I don’t have to, you do. That you don’t get this is evident… > [@](#): > > I think most in this thread don’t realize the ‘burden’, which is so prominently referred to here, is not on those petitioning for re-opening. The burden is clearly on the British Government to account for the proof in its own original Inquest. This last is just … extraordinary. You don’t need evidence. The authorities must constantly and forever re-justify conclusions reached no matter how long ago whenever J. Random Conspiracist says so. **jetblast** , do you accept that there are any conspiracy theories that are wrong? Princess Dianna’s death? WTC Truthers? Moon-landing hoaxers? If they are wrong, the proponents of the theories _all_ claim to have evidence as iron-clad as you claim yours is. Do we keep litigating every conspiracy forever on the premise that there is no onus on the proponent of a novel and prima facie unlikely theory to establish anything first at the threshold? > [@](#): > > It obviously came from the autopsy information (Or Henderson pulled it out of thin air and risked his credibility as an author). The credulousness of this is startling. All authors are always right, because if they weren’t, they’d risk (gasp) their …credibility! What about the excluded middle here? Other possibilities include that he was simply wrong. Or misunderstood. Or misread. Or misinterpreted. Or oversimplified. But I am not arguing with you about “3.9 mg percent” (whatever that means). I am arguing that it is only possible to interpret the consequences of this within broad parameters. I can illustrate what I mean by observing that there are sites that say that as few as [10 Vesparax](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7415572)can kill. Maybe. But that doesn’t mean that 10 _will_ kill. And it doesn’t mean that a person who takes any less than 10 is guaranteed to survive. There were only 10 cases in that study. The concept of LD50 has some illustrative application here. Drugs don’t have a defined lethal dose such that if you take that dose you will die, but just less than that dose will not be fatal. LD50 is the dose at which 50% of subjects (these are sometimes pigs or other human proxies chosen for experimental purposes) die. Now if only half do something as dramatic as die at a particular dose, you can see that there is a great deal of variability in reaction to a particular dose of a particular drug. No doubt 1000mg of morphine will kill anybody. But we are not dealing at that extreme end of possibility here. Oh, by the way, here’s something interesting. I found a [cite](http://www.healthanddna.com/drug-safety-dna-testing/Vesparax-side-effects) that contains the following:- > [@](#): > > Different people taking Vesparax often have very different reactions. One person may tolerate Vesparax well but not get the desired effect, another may have side effects or adverse reactions that make Vesparax intolerable, and yet another may get the desired effect with no side effects. These variations in response and side effects are caused by many variables, but genetic variation and metabolism-based drug, herbal, and food interactions are among the most common. > > The table below shows the current clinical information explaining the metabolism of Vesparax . The site might be shilling for DNA tests. I don’t know if that effects its reliability. But so far it’s the best general cite produced in this debate about Vesparax metabolism. Which is to say, it’s the only one. Where’s yours? Here’s another [site](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1428104/pdf/brjclinpharm00167-0149.pdf) showing an apparently well-controlled study comparing the effects of Vesparax and Midazolam in getting gynaecological patients to sleep, using therapeutic doses. Each patient subject to Vesparax was given one tablet. What was measured was “sleep latency” (ie, how long it took the patient to get to sleep). See the graph on the second page. Note the Vesparax entry. (The Vesparax graph is printed upside down for space reasons). Look at the results. 30% of patients went to sleep within 20 minutes. 50% took 20-40 minutes. 20% took 40-60 minutes. 1-2% did not get to sleep for over 60 minutes. You see now what I mean by variability of individual response? You just can’t say that a particular dose or blood level maps perfectly onto a particular response. And if you can’t, your argument about what experts will say doesn’t get off the ground. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/223 "2010-02-07T03:57:01Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > **dropzone** , I graduated high school in '73, and yes indeed it blew chunks. It was also a very alive time as well. It was that, especially as the Draft had ended for you and I (class of 72). And it was pre-AIDS, so it could be worse. ---
**Author:** ![Jetblast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71c47a/32.png) [@Jetblast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jetblast)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/224 "2010-02-07T19:56:24Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Through all of this, every time **Jetblast** is ignorant of a basic fact or is shown a simple contradiction in his story, he tries to explain it away with a larger conspiracy that is itself harder to prove. ``` Don't misquote me please. I've always said though there is good reason to suggest an intelligence connection to Hendrix's death, I said it should be set aside in order to focus on the more immediate evidence of murder. First things first. ``` > [@Marley23](#): > > His main “witnesses” are Wright and Bannister. Wright was incorrect about Jeffery’s whereabouts and was wrong about pills and wine being shoved down Hendrix’s throat - and for most people, the fact that Hendrix seems to have taken the pills on its own contradicts any plot that relies on both pills and wine because it’s an absurd coincidence. ``` You once again jump way too quickly. First of all, what is keeping anyone from interviewing or cross-examining Wright? What I don't get is there is no reason to not further investigate this. I think it is more than clear that there's enough reason here to look into this at a much more serious level. We need to find these things out. Apparently your side insists there are too many variables but then suggests there are no possible variables within the proof being shown from our side. It is highly suspicious that no one tries to further investigate this to solve some very simple questions. It could be Danneman was involved in a plot, or, as I've read on *Crosstown Torrents*, Danneman could have had a female hysterical reaction and done it herself. Apparently Hendrix had the habit of promising many girlfriends he would marry them. They speculate that Danneman's anger, witnessed earlier that evening at Harvey's party, could have been partly due to Hendrix's telling her he wasn't going to marry her. But we still haven't found out about the veracity of the group member overhearing Jeffery instruct Danneman that she was going to help him poison Hendrix. You would think that someone would try to follow this through? Because, if it is true, then you have the solution right there. So, you give yourselves away but not giving correct heed to what is most compelling here. A true observer of this would demand this stuff be found out and not try to make weaseling excuses around it. You see the reason why you gentlemen hang so prominently high by your own petards here is because you choose to ignore the unignorable. You openly allow the meaning of Danneman's admission on Dutch radio in 1975 that she said she thought the mafia was involved in Hendrix's murder to fly right by you undetected. Now that is a fatal admission because you can't have her official story and this admission exist in the same place. It's either one or the other. And the way reality works is the admission destroys the official story. It's very simple, you can't explain why Danneman, if Hendrix had died accidentally from choking on vomit from an OD, would say Hendrix was murdered by the mafia? Your doubter's case is finished mates. You just can't get around the fact that Danneman's changing her story conforms and points towards the suggestion of murder. While you doubters try to force us to pay attention to your attacks you ignore the fact that your side is wearing its case around its ankles. You allow yourself the luxury of ignoring, that when called to a legal forum to account for this, Danneman committed suicide (?). If a prosecutor were prosecuting my case I think we all damned-well know how he would interpret that - Prosequi too. ``` > [@Marley23](#): > > Bannister was wrong about Hendrix’s height and the idea that anyone would try to remove “bottles” of wine with a small suction tube is absurd. (I’ve seen these types of tubes, and it would be like bailing water from a boat with a thimble.) ``` Again, you give yourself away by trying to minimize the suction tube. Clearly we can find out what the capacity was of this tube and ask Bannister how many he withdrew from Hendrix's gushing windpipe? Or others who witnessed this. That fact you draw doubt on even the removal of wine by suction tube itself shows how bizarrely credulous your doubts are. But you once again give yourself away as seeking to avoid the already obvious. The amount of wine withdrawn by Bannister when combined with the wine seen splashed at the scene creates an amount of wine you can't explain no matter how many specious attempts you make to avoid it. And that wine was witnessed by many people who you can't make weak lack of credibility excuses for. There's simply too much wine there for your weak attempts to cover-up no matter what you say. ``` > [@Marley23](#): > > There are other contradictions here. **Jetblast** suggests intelligence involvement in the “plot” but also implicates Jeffery’s need for cash. ``` The two do not necessarily cancel or contradict each other. Your input is very weak and shows flawed logic - the type used by persons desperately thinking of weak evasions and not seriously considering the facts. ``` > [@Marley23](#): > > All this from someone who misused the word “forensics” about 20 times despite claiming superior knowledge to a prosecutor, and who thinks if your lungs get full of wine, the rest spills into your stomach. ``` Most would assume that superficial number counting on grammar would be the sign of a frivolous argument that it is. One that seeks to avoid the main facts. Ask any of the many people released from jail after 10 years recently from DNA tests their opinion about prosecutors. Your stuff is very weak. The wine is still there and you haven't come anywhere near to accounting for it. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/225 "2010-02-07T22:01:10Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > Again, you give yourself away by trying to minimize the suction tube. Clearly we can find out what the capacity was of this tube and ask Bannister how many he withdrew from Hendrix’s gushing windpipe? Ah, the magic windpipe theory again. _THAR SHE BLOWS!!!_ Except that the human trachea (windpipe) cannot “gush” fluids anywhere remotely near the spectacular amounts Bannister & Co. supposedly reported. According to [this study](http://www.ajronline.org/cgi/content/full/183/2/315), human tracheal volume averaged out to 22.59 cubic cm, or roughly 22 ml (and this was in people with emphysema, who often have larger tracheal volumes than the average person). As previously noted, a single standard-sized bottle of wine holds _750 ml_. So you simply can’t have fountains of wine “gushing” from a human trachea. And what does all this matter if you’re now postulating that Danneman murdered Hendrix in a “female hysterical reaction” (nice appeal to the ladies for support there). Did she go out for cigs or munchies, come back, fly into a rage and impulsively commit murder by wine? Where was MI5 during all this, running shrieking about the apartment having male hysterical reactions? If I was Eric Burdon arriving on the scene and finding all this going on, I’d get out of the place, if it was the last thing I ever did. So, to update, we now have before us the MI5-mob-thug-insurance-scam-message-in-the-dew-fabricating-hysterical-girlfriend-Eric Burdon-at-dawn-18-inch tube-fountains-o’-wine-gushing-from-the-windpipe-barbiturate-polluting-noble gas fart-exploding-3.9-mg-percent-tons-o’ vomit-undeniable forensic theory. Yoo-hoo, Scotland Yard! Better get right on this, before the trail goes cold. ---
**Author:** ![Jetblast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71c47a/32.png) [@Jetblast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jetblast)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/226 "2010-02-07T22:26:27Z")
> [@Noel\_Prosequi](#): > > “Did too. Did not.” ``` I understand you wish to reduce this to a pissing contest. As a matter of fact it has always been your side's obvious strategy from the start. Your contempt for what has been shown is more than apparent and self-creating some kind of legal spider web which you then refer to as the ruling authority in this matter is false and I don't buy it. Most honest people could see you are calling for evidence that you then ignore when adequately shown. Your sophist creations are no replacement for those unanswered points of evidence, nor is saying it is my job to bring the evidence an adequate excuse for not recognizing the meaning of what has already been shown. I assure you any boredom is on your behalf not mine. ``` > [@Noel\_Prosequi](#): > > **jetblast** , do you accept that there are any conspiracy theories that are wrong? Princess Dianna’s death? WTC Truthers? Moon-landing hoaxers? ``` Do you accept that governments regularly violate their own laws and call people who point it out "conspiracy theorists"? Show me the wine in any of those other conspiracies. But honestly, you shoot your own credibility in the foot very openly and in public because any 'prosecutor' would instantly answer that question by saying each and every case must be judged separately and by its own circumstances and evidence. So the fact you ask that question when any competent prosecutor would never accept such a question themselves shows us the level of credibility you have here. Honest people can see right away the only reason you ask it is because you're trying to avoid admitting there's good grounds here for re-opening the case. ``` > [@Noel\_Prosequi](#): > > I can illustrate what I mean by observing that there are sites that say that as few as [10 Vesparax](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7415572)can kill. Maybe. But that doesn’t mean that 10 _will_ kill. And it doesn’t mean that a person who takes any less than 10 is guaranteed to survive. There were only 10 cases in that study. > > The concept of LD50 has some illustrative application here. Drugs don’t have a defined lethal dose such that if you take that dose you will die, but just less than that dose will not be fatal. > > LD50 is the dose at which 50% of subjects (these are sometimes pigs or other human proxies chosen for experimental purposes) die. Now if only half do something as dramatic as die at a particular dose, you can see that there is a great deal of variability in reaction to a particular dose of a particular drug. No doubt 1000mg of morphine will kill anybody. But we are not dealing at that extreme end of possibility here. ``` Sure, but I can't let you take the argument out into the dissipation apparatus you are so obviously trying to set-up here. You don't have a right to because the relevant points still exist within the framework I've set-up. Thus we go back to the necessary argument of asking what we *can* show from what we already know and have. The reason we are arguing the Lethal Dose parameters in the first place is because we need to establish a) what condition Hendrix would have been in from the data shown and b) that he would not have died from the Vesparax alone and c) what the blood level might show us as far as time of ingestion. If we interviewed Hendrix's close friends they could testify as to his use of sleeping pills or other barbiturates to establish a reasonable suggestion of tolerance. So we could see cases of where Hendrix was said to have taken large doses of barbiturates and what the results were. I suggest the outcome would be that Hendrix would trend towards the tolerant side of the spectrum. But you are forgetting an important operative fact here that Hendrix did not die from a Vesparax overdose. Let's involve ALL the relevant operating factors here. The reason we are looking into Vesparax and its effects is to try to determine a reasonable time period for which Hendrix ingested the drug. The LD is one factor but only in relation to all the other factors. Since we have 10 pills missing from Danneman's Vesparax package, and Danneman claims she took 1, we can work under the assumption that there is a good possibility Hendrix had 9 Vesparax in him. So the relative question is, still, how long would it take for someone like Hendrix to reach 3.9mgs percent of blood Quinalbarbitone? I suggest the absorption rates do not vary by so much as to preclude any determination that there was too much time involved for the pills to be shoved down Hendrix's throat followed by wine as claimed. So we can then focus on trying to get an expert to tell us what effect a 3.9mg level would have on a person like Hendrix? Especially what level of consciousness or ability to administer large amounts of wine into himself, as well as getting several corks open while under a clobbering dose of Vesparax. It's important to try to define some coherent relative terms. The main point of this particular argument is to determine how the 3.9mg dose shows that the tablets had to be ingested an amount of time long enough before the death to preclude any forcing of pills down the throat followed by wine. Next, we still need to establish a reasonable definition of Hendrix's condition under this 3.9mg dose as far as functional ability to administer wine into himself (and possibly opening corks). We need to get an expert to tell us that the reasonably-established absorption time required to reach the 3.9mg level was enough to determine certain things in relation to the evidence. But, most importantly, that this absorption time could not occur *faster* than the period claimed. It is the establishment of a gap of time that is most meaningful here. I have recently found out new information that Danneman had changed her story about Hendrix taking the Vesparax. She admitted that she gave Hendrix the pills. This makes a complete change of all parts of her story which can only point towards foul play. Even Prosequi must be forced to admit that this is at least suspicious if not damning. And let's not forget Danneman admitted to washing 'sick' off Hendrix with wine. (Something she did not tell the Inquest) ``` > [@Noel\_Prosequi](#): > > "Look at the results. 30% of patients went to sleep within 20 minutes. 50% took 20-40 minutes. 20% took 40-60 minutes. 1-2% did not get to sleep for over 60 minutes. > > You see now what I mean by variability of individual response? You just can’t say that a particular dose or blood level maps perfectly onto a particular response. > > And if you can’t, your argument about what experts will say doesn’t get off the ground. ``` I think we've lost track of the pertinent argument here. It is still what 3.9mg Quinalbarbitone, along with the other substances in Hendrix's body, would do as far as capacity to function or inducement to vomit? The only relevant study would be one that involves a strong dose of 9 tablets. So the argument is, really, what variables can we eliminate from such a strong 3.9mg dose? Also, I'd like to point out that the prosecutor's role in such a case like this is usually proving the case for murder. So Prosequi awkwardly positions himself on the wrong side and I hope people detect the wrongness in that and obvious conflict of interest. No, you haven't answered why the British government should be allowed to get away with avoiding admitting its own case has been thoroughly destroyed by Danneman's admissions and story changes. And the fact you won't admit that is grounds in and of itself to legally sue and force the British government to re-open the case - not on the merit of the petition but on the failure of the government's own case. You don't live up to what you preach here. And your thoroughly public avoidance of it only serves to put what you say in its true light (which is very dark indeed). Aside: Wright claimed Jeffery's thugs "broke-in to Danneman's flat". I don't think there was any sign of a break-in at the flat. (Which possibly shows others were in on it and that it was an inside job). ``` ---
**Author:** ![Noel\_Prosequi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b19c9b/32.png) [@Noel\_Prosequi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Noel_Prosequi)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/227 "2010-02-07T23:05:00Z")
> [@](#): > > I think we’ve lost track of the pertinent argument here. It is still what 3.9mg Quinalbarbitone, along with the other substances in Hendrix’s body, would do as far as capacity to function or inducement to vomit? The only relevant study would be one that involves a strong dose of 9 tablets. So the argument is, really, what variables can we eliminate from such a strong 3.9mg dose? But genius, there are very unlikely to _be_ any such studies! How you gonna get ethical studies that involve giving people 8 (or even 16) times the therapeutic dose? People are not Volvos that you can test to destruction. The only such studies are likely to be ex post facto studies based on overdose cases that come into hospital, like the 10 member death study I mentioned. These will almost never have enough numbers to produce valid results as specific as you need to prove your case. Your theory is derived from the “[magic database](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MagicalDatabase)” fantasy that drives TV shows - there is a database for everything. There isn’t. This is part of the reason why any real expert is unlikely to be able to tell you with the specificity you require what the effect in any specific case of a specific level of secobarbital (Quinalbarbitone) MUST have been. And secobarbital is not the only ingredient of Vesparax. So unless you can show us these experts you claim can say all you want them to, STFU. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/228 "2010-02-08T03:10:13Z")
Other failed conspiracy theories _are_ relevant. Look upon those fractured chains of flawed reasoning as history’s lessons drowned in red wine. I’m sorry you see the facts and logic presented here as a black fly in your chardonnay, but realism can be painful. I can’t understand that Danneman though. She has Moet et Chandon in a pretty cabinet, but hauls out sweet cherry wine (I don’t know about you, but I haven’t had that spirit here since 1969). Poor **jetblast**. Never understood a single word he said, but he always had some mighty fine wine. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/229 "2010-02-08T03:48:20Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > I’ve always said though there is good reason to suggest an intelligence connection to Hendrix’s death But there isn’t. And if you think it should be set aside, you can’t go around implying it over and over again. _You’re the one raising the subject._ > [@](#): > > First of all, what is keeping anyone from interviewing or cross-examining Wright? What I don’t get is there is no reason to not further investigate this. Because there’s no reason to investigate it further. His story and the theory you have created about it are both full of holes and they’re both absurd. > [@](#): > > They speculate Yes, they do. Endlessly. But they don’t provide proof and neither do you. > [@](#): > > Again, you give yourself away by trying to minimize the suction tube. Have you ever seen one of these suction tubes? Because I have. There is probably some variation in size, but they are thin and have little suction power. It would be absurd to use them to remove bottles of wine from the throat of a patient. He would die hours before the job was done. If Bannister says he removed bottles’ worth with a suction tube, his memory has failed him or he is lying. > [@](#): > > The two do not necessarily cancel or contradict each other. They don’t support each other. > [@](#): > > Most would assume that superficial number counting on grammar would be the sign of a frivolous argument that it is. One that seeks to avoid the main facts. And you ignored my list of all the statements you haven’t backed up and made no attempt to support them. I think that speaks for itself. ---
**Author:** ![Noel\_Prosequi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b19c9b/32.png) [@Noel\_Prosequi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Noel_Prosequi)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/230 "2010-02-08T05:15:45Z")
I’m so cheesed off I can’t contribute a song pun to a fundamentally American board without some explanation, or no-one will get the reference. There is an Oz band called Cold Chisel (hugely successful rockers). They have a song that starts: _Once I smoked a Danneman cigar Drove a foreign car Baby that was years ago I left it all behind Had a friend, I heard she died On a needle she was crucified Baby that was years ago I left it all behind for my…_ And what did he leave it all behind for? [Cheap Wine](http://www.coldchisel.com.au/l1_cheapwine.html) (and a three day growth.) This song was released in the late 70s/early 80s. It is not about Hendrix at all. Eerie coincidence, though. [jetblast reasoning] Obviously, Cold Chisel were in on the hit. THERE CAN BE NO OTHER EXPLANATION for all the references to things related to Hendrix! I think we ought to examine Jimmy Barnes’s background. He is Scottish by birth - this implies links with British Intelligence - IT CAN BE NO COINCIDENCE that James Bond (as played by Sean Connery) was Scottish. And Jimmy Barnes’s initials are the same as James Bond’s! And they are Australian! IT CAN BE NO COINCIDENCE that it was Australian authorities who were behind the discrediting of Dr Bannister! Now we have some good evidence as to exactly who it was who did that, and why! Blather, blather, blather… Why are the British and Australian governments still allowing Cold Chisel songs to be played? They MUST be called to account! No more hiding behind legal obfuscation! I demand a Royal Commission! Anyone who opposes that is clearly on the side of murderers, now that the OBVIOUS evidence is laid out! [/jetblast reasoning] I am proud of my very first attempt at inventing a conspiracy theory. I await your inevitable confirmation that I am indeed a person of great perspicacity to see it all in its grandeur. There couldn’t possibly be any criticism due to come my way, because the evidence is so watertight. I give you all permission to subscribe to my newsletter. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Jetblast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71c47a/32.png) [@Jetblast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jetblast)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/231 "2010-02-08T21:57:25Z")
I consider this important discovery. I found it on _Crosstown Torrents_. It is in the Buzzy Linhart Interview thread on _Torrents_. ``` This is vitally important and shows the state of mind the only witness to Hendrix's death was in at the time of his death. It is a clip from Henderson's *'Scuse me While I Kiss The Sky* again. I have to add that as much as I seriously disagree with some of the entries being waged against this topic that I appreciate Straight Dope's hosting it. ``` > [@](#): > > " Dannemann published a book in 1995, The Inner World of Jimi Hendrix, in which she describes fantastic plans she and Hendrix had allegedly made to marry, to have a child, to live in Europe. He encouraged her painting, he telephoned her mother, he was concerned about her father, who she maintained had recently had a heart attack. She understood that they could not officially announce their wedding yet, since the press would surely challenge her father’s recovery. On the cover and title page of her book she prefaced her name as author with: “by his fiancée.” > > Most of Hendrix’s close friends doubted that he would even consider marriage to Dannemann. Jimi proposed marriage on many a one-night stand, but it was understood to be essentially an amusing extension of/variation on a pickup line. > > Dannemann’s variances in her stories of Jimi’s last days are now legend, and many of them have been completely discounted. Her statements at the inquest perhaps began these fictions. Researchers have pretty well established that Hendrix was not living with her at the Samarkand Hotel. He had no clothes there other than a headband, but his most important possession was there: his Fender Stratocaster. It has been established that he was changing clothes and taking meals at the Cumberland Hotel. He didn’t often sleep there, but neither did he often stay at Monika’s. > > Another little-known piece of the puzzle that took years to surface concerned three people who encountered Jimi and Dannemann as they drove in traffic on the afternoon of September 17, hours before Hendrix would die under extremely mysterious circumstances. > > Phillip Harvey was tooling along in his 1968 Mustang with two young and attractive teenagers in the front seat with him. The girls saw Jimi and waved, and Jimi waved back. They came up next to each other and got to chatting. Harvey invited Jimi to his home for a drink, and Jimi accepted, but first they followed him to the Cumberland Hotel, where Jimi got his messages, and then Jimi, with Monika driving, followed Harvey to his nearby home. > > Monika parked her sports car in front of Harvey’s fashionable town home. It was clear he was a wealthy young man of status. One of the young women was Anne Day, a redheaded Canadian folksinger of nineteen who was staying there with Phillip; the other one was Penny Ravenhill, who was sixteen. They were, according to Harvey, “very attractive in a natural kind of way, they were both wearing tight blue jeans without any makeup or adornment at all.” Harvey contrasted their appearance by commenting that Dannemann appeared to be about thirty years of age, “an overly made-up lady with dyed blonde hair.” > > Harvey waited for more than twenty years before coming forward to recount Hendrix and Dannemann’s visit to his home. The good scene turned ugly at the end with Monika becoming violently angry with Hendrix when he retired to a small room with one of the girls. Dannemann stormed out of the house, shouting loudly on the respectable street that Hendrix was a “fucking pig.” Embarrassed, Jimi followed her out. She refused to return and Jimi came back inside to apologize profusely. He left and Harvey watched them drive off noting that the time of their departure was about 10:30 P.M. > > Phillip Harvey, the son of the prominent politician Lord Harvey of Prestbury, a Conservative member of parliament, is nowadays known as the Honorable Phillip Harvey. He had remained silent about the encounter because of his family’s prominence in public service. But after his father’s death, in 1994, he felt it was all right to reveal this significant prelude to Hendrix’s death. > > Dannemann maintained at the inquest and in statements to the public and to writers and others that after the encounter with Harvey, Anne, and Penny, she and Hendrix went to her hotel suite at the Samarkand. But others maintain that he went on to a party at the home of Peter Cameron very soon after the visit to Harvey’s. He did not take Monika in with him. Devon was there; Stella and Alan Douglas; his old nemesis, Angie Burdon; and several others. Dannemann maintains that Jimi asked her to pick him up after a short time, but those at the party indicate that Jimi came, ate Chinese food, hung out, and was cool until sometime later when Dannemann began ringing him on the intercom. He put her off but she persisted by coming back in half an hour. This became a heated thing. Stella got on the intercom and was extremely rude to Monika. This did not put her off. Pretty soon, Angie recalled, guests were hanging out the window yelling at Monika. They cried, “Fuck off” and “Leave him alone,” yet Dannemann persisted. Then finally he went to the intercom, mumbled something, and then without saying anything, just got into the elevator and split. “That was around three in the morning by then,” according to Angie Burdon. This may have angered Dannemann all the more since Jimi had stayed so long at a party where she was not welcome, and in fact had been ridiculed, insulted, and cursed. > > Monika Dannemann turns out to be quite the mystery woman. There is little if any biographical information on her in England, the United States, or in Germany. She may or may not have been who she said she was. Suppressed information that has come to the fore provides a surprising turnaround from Dannemann’s long-disputed versions of her story of Hendrix’s last days. Also to consider are the various monumental motivations of the characters interacting with Hendrix during his last days. > > Monika Dannemann is at the top of that monumental motivation list. Although maniacally opposed to any notion that she may have indeed been just another “groupie,” Dannemann’s suppressions tended to reinforce that notion of her own groupiedom. Other black musicians, such as Ram John Holder, Al Anderson (lead guitarist with Bob Marley and the Wailers), and Jerome Rimson (the itinerant African-American bass player), all spoke of a close relationship with her before Hendrix came along. Her unrealistic fantasies of married life with Hendrix, and her great anger with him and the girls they encountered with Phillip Harvey, reveal an irrational, volatile, dangerous side to her carefully constructed image. Her struggle to express herself creatively and be validated seems to lie behind many of her public statements and actions. In fact, no one ever heard of her until Hendrix died in her bed." ---
**Author:** ![Jetblast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71c47a/32.png) [@Jetblast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jetblast)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/232 "2010-02-08T22:11:36Z")
Also critically important. I confess offering less than an adequately informed case because this wasn’t included. From the Buzzy Linhart interview. (Linhart speaking): > [@](#): > > I picked up the telephone on the receptionist’s desk and it was Dolly Dagger (Devon Wilson) telling me I had to believe her. What she told me was that Jimi had called her the day or so before and told her that he had been up for days. He had talked to his doctor in New York City and the doctor said “You’ve got to get some sleep” - the doctor said “Do you want me to call in some sleeping pills for you to a doctor I know in London?” Jimi said" No, that’s OK, there’s Tuinols in the medicine cabinet in the bathroom here." They agreed that Jimi- having a great tolerance to this type of drug -would need to take 3 capsules. But this turned out to be the German Tuinols which were the EQUIVALENT of three a piece, so they turned out to have the potency of 9 capsules." (It’s been reported by Sharon Lawrence that Jimi took 9 capsules, but what he took was the German equivalent of nine capsules - and Monika must have known this. If she wasn’t sure she should have said something.) ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/233 "2010-02-08T23:42:08Z")
How disappointing. From the beautiful complexities of the MI5-mob-thug-insurance-scam-message-in-the-dew-fabricating-hysterical-girlfriend-Eric Burdon-at-dawn-18-inch tube-fountains-o’-wine-gushing-from-the-windpipe-barbiturate-polluting-noble gas fart-exploding-3.9-mg-percent-tons-o’ vomit-undeniable forensic theory, we descend to “woman scorned”. You can’t get much mileage out of that. If Monika was so pissed off at Jimi having younger women around and decided to kill him, what becomes of the geysers of wine theory? Wouldn’t she be a lot more likely to do a Claudine Longet and shoot him? \*"Another little-known piece of the puzzle that took years to surface concerned three people who encountered Jimi and Dannemann as they drove in traffic on the afternoon of September 17 [/quote] Where else would you drive? [quote] One of the young women was Anne Day, a redheaded Canadian folksinger of nineteen who was staying there with Phillip; the other one was Penny Ravenhill, who was sixteen. They were, according to Harvey, “very attractive in a natural kind of way, they were both wearing tight blue jeans without any makeup or adornment at all.”\* Gotta love that natural beauty. Though Monika seems to have had [an abundance of natural charm](http://groupieblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/dannemann.jpg) herself. Say, instead of this pointless speculation about Hendrix’s death, can we move on to the real mystery - whatever happened to Hendrix’s black Stratocaster? I demand we reopen the (guitar) case. ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/234 "2010-02-09T00:10:12Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > Also critically important. I confess offering less than an adequately informed case because this wasn’t included. From the Buzzy Linhart interview. (Linhart speaking): How can you possibly think that the God-knows-how-many-hand hearsay babbling of pathetic people is critically important to anyone or anything? And I’ll ask this again: how can you think your ridiculous beliefs are worthy of an official investigation if you can’t even persuade a single person on a message board to come over to your way of thinking? ---
**Author:** ![Noel\_Prosequi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b19c9b/32.png) [@Noel\_Prosequi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Noel_Prosequi)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/235 "2010-02-09T01:49:16Z")
Within limits, it is sometimes possible to present alternative theories. Thus, if A and B are known to have been with the deceased when he died in circumstances that obviously lead to the conclusion of murder, one can sometimes say A killed him in combination with B, B killed him in combination with A or both killed him. But there are strict limits to this. But here, you start with the idea that Hendrix was murdered, and have so many mutually inconsistent theories that the position is absurd. Was it Jeffrey who killed him because of some CIA connection? The mob? Jeffrey because of some theft? Danneman because of jealously? Remember the inconsistency - theory X cancels out theory Y and so on. The fact that you have so many disparate possibilities is an overwhelming demonstration that you have no coherent case at all. The more possibilities that are left open, the _less_ cogent your case is, not more. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/236 "2010-02-09T02:10:51Z")
This is turning into that Onion story: ‘JFK shot 563 times simultaneously by the Mob, CIA, FBI, Cubans, Russians.’ Now Jimi Hendrix was killed by Michael Jeffery for money, and as a COINTELPRO-style operation, and by his jealous girlfriend. ---
**Author:** ![Jetblast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71c47a/32.png) [@Jetblast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jetblast)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/237 "2010-02-09T18:59:41Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Have you ever seen one of these suction tubes? Because I have. There is probably some variation in size, but they are thin and have little suction power. It would be absurd to use them to remove bottles of wine from the throat of a patient. He would die hours before the job was done. If Bannister says he removed bottles’ worth with a suction tube, his memory has failed him or he is lying. ``` I'm very sure that if we could somehow arrange to have Bannister in a courtroom situation with the equipment involved we would all very quickly see Bannister to be credible and the amount of wine to quickly establish itself well-above any reasonable amount of wine that would possibly fit the official Inquest's determination of the cause of death. Smart people who are reading this would see the true facts we would establish by doing this and how they cut right through Marley's dubious denials and show his input to be what it is. In fact Marley's laughable denials of the obvious only serve to strengthen my case in their attempts to cheat reality. There's no doubt many suction tubes plus wine that continued to 'gush' out after those tubes were evacuated can only point towards an unaccountable amount of wine. Marley exposes himself as dwelling in the realm of non-reality because he makes the accusation above that no tube Bannister could possibly use would be adequate to the job. And that's just silly, as are Marley's self-referenced protests. He suggests that the often-done procedure of windpipe clearing that those tubes are designed for is something no equipment is adequate for and no judgments can be made over - which is absurd in itself. Again, Bannister on a stand vs Marley would quickly clear-up this nonsense. Marley deals in the absurd and leaves himself open to the question of "what, then, do they use to clear fluids from the windpipe? Never does Marley stop for one moment to think that the reason Bannister is commenting is because there was so much wine that he had trouble clearing it. I believe most intelligent people would see Marley's ridiculous denials to be what they are. He suggests hospital equipment would be unable to clear a windpipe in less time than hours. He offers that without shrugging at the obvious stupidity of it on its face. Hence we have the value of Marley's input. From my readings there are 4 bottles of wine present at the death scene. Two uncorked bottles taken from the party by Hendrix and two bottles at the flat brought there by Dannemann. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/238 "2010-02-09T20:02:55Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > Bannister on a stand vs Marley would quickly clear-up this nonsense. I’d pay good money to see this. Kind of a Dope Inquest of the Absurd. **Noel Prosequi** could be Lord High Prosecutor, I’d volunteer as the Dubious Expert Witness testifying about tube and windpipe capacity and **Crotalus** would report the proceedings for TruTV while **Jetblast** anchored coverage for www.whale.to. Dynamite ratings, I tells ya. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/239 "2010-02-09T20:10:56Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > Smart people who are reading this would see the true facts we would establish by doing this and how they cut right through Marley’s dubious denials and show his input to be what it is. I wonder why none of the smart people are posting. And why you won’t provide cites for all the points I mentioned upthread. They’re waiting, you know. > [@](#): > > There’s no doubt many suction tubes plus wine that continued to ‘gush’ out after those tubes were evacuated can only point towards an unaccountable amount of wine. Or a ludicrous scenario that never happened. > [@](#): > > He suggests that the often-done procedure of windpipe clearing that those tubes are designed for is something no equipment is adequate for and no judgments can be made over - which is absurd in itself. Have you ever seen one othese devices used, **Jetblast**? Because I have. Repeatedly. They are small and not very powerful because they are intended to suck out small things without damaging throat tissue. So I stand by what I said: it would be ridiculous for a physician to try to suction out tube after tube of wine. Maybe you’re picturing something enormous like the breathing tube that gets attached to a respirator, but those don’t suck air out of the throat. That would be like shoving a vacuum cleaner into someone’s mouth. [The tubes actually look like this.](http://www.tracheostomy.com/care/suction.htm) I’m sure there is some variety in size, but I believe you already posted that a tracheostomy was performed on Hendrix, so a device very similar to this would have been used. See how thin it is? Do you see why this would be a problem? That’s aside from your awful failure in anatomy, which is frankly a bigger problem than the size of the suction tube. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578/240 "2010-02-09T20:23:55Z")
Oh - hey! I was off in MPSIMS, in another thread since my last post back on page 2 of this thread…so, did I miss anything? ::d & r:: 😃 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jimi-hendrix-was-murdered/525578.md?page=13)