
Although Monika might have exaggerated her importance, she was not the only one capable of stretching the truth. In the midst of her accusations against Dannemann, Etchingham also made several against Hendrix as well. She described him as paranoid, for starters. She also said that he occasionally exploded in sudden bursts of violence against both men and women, and because of his great physical strength beat them savagely. Lastly, she said that he had been strung out on drugs for many years, starting with marijuana, and eventually working his way up to becoming a full-fledged heroin addict.

Pridgeon had no obvious reason to lie or exaggerate the incident, which clearly demonstrated Hendrix’s ability to wreak mayhem against a person getting on his nerves. And since she really hasn’t been shown as deceptive about anything, her account is fairly reliable. Yet, Etchingham’s descriptions of Hendrix’s violent tendencies are generally more intense, and many lack confirming sources. Nevertheless, her depiction of Hendrix as wild man pales to that of former co-manager Eric Burdon, who offered a number of third-person stories of graphic brutality, complete with victims on the edge of death, and eyeballs hanging out of their sockets.
Three nights after Hendrix’s death, and several days before the coroner’s inquest could even begin to determine anything, Burdon, without evidence or first-hand knowledge, declared Jimi’s death a suicide during a BBC television interview:
His death was deliberate. He was happy dying. He died happily and he used the drug to phase himself out of this life and go some place else. Because he realized that for him to stop off and correct what was wrong with his organization, the fact that he was being artistically stifled, he wasn't receiving his money I don't think, as much as he should have been getting. He realized that to stop off and do that, would kill him artistically anyway. Jimi just exited at the time he felt it was right.Since Burdon could not have possibly known, especially at that date, how Hendrix died, and since the evidence we have strongly challenges the suicide verdict in any scenario, we might see his assuredness as a stupid mistake at best. At worst, we could it as a deliberate attempt to mislead, an attempt to portray Hendrix in a certain light that would show him as simply self-destructive.
Etchingham most likely exaggerated Hendrix’s violent episodes. But she most definitely exaggerated Hendrix’s drug usage. According to her, Hendrix had become a hardcore heroin user by the time their relationship had ended. Yet, out of all of Hendrix’s associates, she alone says that he was a heroin addict. While it’s possible that he might have experimented with the drug, he did not show any signs of prolonged heroin usage. He did not, for instance, have track marks, the arm scabs that attest to an exhausted supply of fresh veins. None of his other friends or acquaintances associated him with the drug. He had only gotten permission to leave Canada because the authorities believed that he didn’t use heroin, and a jury would later acquit him of the charge for the same reason. While in the US Army, his superiors specifically tested him for heroin, but came up negative. Dr. Thurston’s autopsy found no evidence of heroin use at all, and he did not indicate any severe damage to the septum, which would have occurred if Hendrix had a serious habit of snorting heroin or cocaine (which Etchingham also alleged that he did). The aforementioned David Henderson investigated Hendrix’s drug habits extensively. While Jimi indulged in whisky, marijuana and LSD, heroin was never his vice of choice by all accounts except Etchingham’s.
Stepping back, we can see that both the Etchingham and Burdon’s statements about Hendrix fall into a certain pattern. Jimi sporadically committed acts of aggression, which troubled him as much as they did the objects of his ire. Yet, Etchingham and Burdon might very well have exaggerated these acts, inexcusable as they were in the first place. Secondly, while Hendrix did in fact indulge in drugs, Etchingham portrays them as the center of his being. Although Hendrix shared troubling thoughts with Pridgeon, Etchingham, and Devon Wilson, Burdon exaggerated his depression, depicting it as so severe that he was on the road to actively do himself in.
Such stories would tend to diminish the esteem of a popular figure, especially if the figure were dead, and therefore in no position to refute the allegations. As The Church’ Committee’s Final Report and Supplements would indicate, exaggerating a “dangerous person’s” shortcomings were simply a matter of routine procedure. As one internal CIA memo instructed:
Show them as scurrilous and depraved. Call attention to their habits and living conditions, explore every possible embarrassment. Send in women and sex, break up marriages. Have members arrested on marijuana charges. Investigate personal conflicts or animosities between them. Send articles to the newspapers showing their depravity. Use narcotics and free sex to entrap. Use misinformation to confuse and disrupt. Get records of their bank accounts. Obtain specimens of handwriting. Provoke target groups into rivalries that may result in death [emphasis added].In Hendrix’s case, attempts to blacken his reputation generally failed, perhaps in large part because of Dannemann, the very bitter rival of the woman making the allegations. For twenty-three years, Dannemann and Etchingham fought tooth and nail to establish themselves as Jimi’s most important love. Since Dannemann’s involvement with Hendrix became known immediately after his death, and her testimony at the coroner’s inquest led to a lot of press coverage, Dannemann had the upper hand in this battle, and she repeatedly called Etchingham a liar until the day she died.
Devon Wilson’s claim on Hendrix would probably surpass that of both women. But she died only five months after Hendrix, and thus could not really say much on the matter. Etchingham’s claim as his supreme consort took root with her investigation, but really bore fruit after Danneman’s death in 1996. In 1998, Etchingham published her Hendrix biography Through Gypsy Eyes, which received due publicity, especially in the UK. Although she never backed downed from her earlier accounts, Etchingham’s views of Hendrix were generally positive. She later embarked on a successful campaign to persuade the British government to declare the apartment she and Hendrix once shared a national historical landmark. With official recognition, she might very well have gained the advantage over Dannemann in the battle for Jimi’s legacy.
Figure 3. Etchingham/Hendrix Apartment

Figure 4. Closeup of the Blue Commemorative Plaque

My immediate thought pertains to your title: "Battle for legacy"-
ReplyDeleteI've known who Hendrix was since my teens in the mid 80's- I was told emphatically that he was a gifted musician.
And I listened to his music to find out if he was as talented as my friends said he was- no argument from me that he was.
Now- for a girl in the south to know who Jimi was some 15 years after he died- and even listened to his music though I was not a "musical" person out side of the
a cappella chorus- I'd say that's a pretty clear indication that he was the only winner in the Battle for Legacy. I had never heard of the women until this post.
Thank goodness his music lives on in audio recordings and film- and in the people who admire him.
Wow. I can't believe you're still on the "Kill The Music" thing. I guess I have some catching up to do...
ReplyDeleteIt's true that Jimi was a legend and his music is nothing if not great, but I think more "light" needs to be shed on this whole thing. The "other side" of Jimi Hendrix (Cliche?). I am just reading all this for the first time, but it sounds almost like he would be remembered as a jerk or an asshole if it wasn't for his amazing music to cover it up.
Then again, maybe I don't know what I am talking about and I should go read the whole thing and play catch up...
'His death was deliberate. He was happy dying.'
ReplyDeletewow.
when i was 10, i pestered my papa to let me learn the electric guitar cuz i was in love with jimi hendrix. and this from a chinese-burmese girl. heh.
p/s hi, i r back :)
Good point, Cora. Hendrix was in fact the winner in his own bbattle for legacy, mostly because of his influence on other musicians (even classical musicians). Perhaps that might explain why those who claimed to be victimized by his behavior tended to gloss over it in later years (even Redding).
ReplyDeleteUh, Yeah, I'm still on the Kill the Music Thing, Rayke. I'm slow posting because I've been busy with the dissertation. But unlike some, I've posted SOMETHING in the past few weeks:-)
But I'm of a mind to think that his flaws may have been esaggerated a tad. Some of them were really exploded by Henderson as early as 1978, so that might have also helped to take off the edge.
Boo, I'm so happy to see you. Welcome back to the cyberworld (hopefully to stay). I'd gotten into the habit of checking your site every now and then in hopes that you posted something. I just found out, that you posted something last Monday. Shame on me for missing it. But I haven't missed your latest post, though.
What I find interesting (other than your presence) is that you learned how to play guitar (any recordings) and that Hendrix influenced you so many years later.
If only you lived in New York....
wow i actually sat and read the entire "kill the music" "series" and quite amazingly..ddint not find it too long!!...maybe coz its abt music....Jimi Hendrix rocks and literally... i guess all geniuses have their insanities...not sure if all wat was said abt hendrix is true...but yup..am sure he wud have had some streak of madness in him..
ReplyDeleteWow...that's a lot of hearsay to go through.
ReplyDeleteWhyami, I agree with you that we would almost expect a certain amount of eccentricity in any creative type. Mozart, for example, had a reputation for womanizing that rivaled Hendrix, and his other quirks put a strain on him. And, like Hendrix, he died young as well.
ReplyDeleteYou ain't just whistling Dixie, Chick. There is a tremendous amount of statements to wade through. Usually, statements might disagree, but they'll have elements in common, and so you can pick out all that stuff as having a stronger basis in truth. In Hendrix's case, very few statements have anything in common. So it's a night mare, all right, but not one in which there could be some resolution, aided in large part by forensic science.
hey... off the topic but I just came here via my site meter via yours... and thought it was interesting the difference (beyond the basic stuff blah blah blah) in the amount of time that people spend here on x. My readers come in and if they stay it is for 2-4 minutes... yours get out the coffee, cozy up in a chair and hang with ya!
ReplyDeleteand lol to the gecko comment. I knew it would come! *wink
I'd have to agree with mayden on the legacy thing. As far as those girlfriends....that's just how I knew to refer them too. Those girlfriends. I'd always heard he had several, but never anything definite.
ReplyDeleteI've really enjoyed this post. We watched out Jimmi dvd this weekend....again..
I looked at it in a completely different light. He was more of a person.
Etchingham’s polarization from melodramatic statements about Hendrix’s demeanor and alleged drug use to convincing the British to make their old apartment a landmark is a curious shift in attitude. I like you addition of the CIA’s discrediting guide, although since you mention it, I would like to know what you’re getting at from that angle? Are you saying that some CIA program came to influence statements made about Jimi by his closest acquaintances after his death to try to “muddy the waters”? It wouldn’t surprise me in the least, especially since certain agendas were always at stake from successful and respected artists that held a sway over the thoughts of youth…
ReplyDeletewhat a sad story...sad..not knowing what could be real...sad..not knowing the why of everything that happened...sad..knowing that somebody would deliberately go out of ones way to harm someone else...sad...knowing that extreme popularity seems to lead to tragedy..for this person..for Monroe...for other artists..why?...I'm still asking...
ReplyDeleteAnd will have to return later after school..yes...I need to unwind later coz' I know it's going to be a challenging morning....meet you up here after lunch...
Hi!..
Well, now...that's a catfight. I'm not surprised though. I have friends that play in a local band and it's amusing to watch the women stake claim on each of them. It'd make sense that it's intensified when the musician is well known.
ReplyDeleteOff topic, but I watched a TV show on the Majestic 12 tonight. Of course, I already knew some of the information. See, I actually absorb the wisdom you impart! :P
Kate, I don't think that people are all that interested in what I write. I think they just fall asleep while reading my post with the computer tuned on the page. That's why my reader times are longer:-)
ReplyDeleteSchaumi, you and Cora are making me rethink something. Perhaps you're both right in that none of them really were all that close to Hendrix, and we should perhaps take that into consideration when looking at what they said.
John, Etchingham's description of Hendrix makes me wonder why she wouldn't simply trash him as a lout. True, people mellow with age, and she might not be so keen to tear down Jimi in the eyes of an adoring public.
As far as the disinformation thing goes, I don't mean to imply that Etchingham or anyone else was a disinformation agent on the payroll of the CIA or anything. But what happened to Hendrix, in terms of his reputation, happened pretty much as described in this memo. Since at least the depiction of Hendrix as a heroin addict is false, we have to wonder if the inaccuracy is simply a slamming from a disgruntled ex, or something deeper.
Interesting thought, Lux. Does growing popularity make one a threat? Not just in Hendrix's case, of course, but in Monroe's and others.
I look at it from another point of view. I ask the question of whether or not the selective murder of dissident entertainers might have been a policy, at least at one time. I propose no answers. But we have more than enough evidence to know that it's not a stupid question.
Angie, was that documentary on The Discovery Channel? If it's on a cable channel I have, I'll definitely watch it.
Thanks to for putting the catfight question in a better perspective.
X:DELL said: '...the selective murder of dissident entertainers might have been a policy, at least at one time. I propose no answers.....
ReplyDeleteI say:
So now I'm thinking.....like that never crossed my mind...but...it most certainly isn't a stupid question...and how intriguing when one considers the possiblity...and if it were so...possible...then...why?...why the killings...
hmmmm...
after going over all this, it really doesn't seem to be a question of 'he killed himself'...more of 'who killed him?'
ReplyDeleteHistory Channel...it was a show called 'Conspiracy?' that they run from time to time. I think their website shows the schedule for it...if you have that channel.
ReplyDeleteLux, what can I say? I can only say that I can understand why people kill other people, but only from an intellectual perspective. Yet, no matter where you go in the world, people have historically exerted brute force in an effort to gain control of others. I hear that this still goes on.
ReplyDeleteAs to why celebrities? Think about it in terms of what's called 'sociological imagination.' Celebrities function as agents of influence and identification within our society. As one scholar put it to me years ago, there is a certain point where Michael Jackson ceases to be Michael Jackson, and instead becomes an icon, representative of anything you want to associate the icon with.
Libby, I have to agree with you. I'm thinking too that looking upon his, and similar deaths, as potential homicides is important, especially when official explanations lack much credibility at all.
Thanks, Angie. I knew I could count on you.
Your read times are long X. Dell because your posts are so well done and there's so much information to absorb. And then there's your writing and the way you eke out the info in the most suspensful way.
ReplyDeleteI really liked the comment Mayden's V. made about legacy also.
Etchingham's critical view of Jimi was partly influenced by her relationship to him. I've recently read her book 'Through Gypsy Eyes' and have a better idea of why she said those things. You need to understand that both Kathy and Jimi came from broken family backgrounds. Both were used to viewing personal relationships in a cynical way. I don't want to get into the psychological explanations why Jimi reacted violently, but I'm sure it was due to his mother's terrible unfaithfulness to his father and Al Hendrix's reactions. Kathy too probably had a deep cynicism of men implanted in her by her father's weakness in their family. It's all in her book.
ReplyDeleteThe key to understanding Kathy's bizarre claims about Jimi's savage acts and drug abuse is found in examining her relationship to him and how Jimi left her to go to America and how their relationship dissolved from there. Jimi associated with known heroin user Devon Wilson and did increase his drug intake in America where he was constantly accompanied by a drug entourage at the height of the 60's. So, yes, Jimi probably did snort a little heroin every now and then, but the real force behind Kathy's claims was probably her jealously for Devon Wilson and her agency in Jimi's separation from her. Kathy probably combined her rows with Jimi as his lover with Jimi's overall drug scene, much of which existed outside of him himself. If you read Kathy's book she had a tendency to back-bite. Most of the time Jimi was the unusually gentle man he was remembered as. Kathy prefers to sell herself as the person who was so close to Jimi as to know the real man and in doing so went too far in her depiction. This is strictly the product of Kathy's particular prism and her fight to keep Jimi and that's all it is. So when you read Kathy's statements that Jimi was a heroin-crazed violent maniac you are hearing about the worst things Jimi did while under extreme pressure from all sides after going from an unknown to being a stressed-out, exhausted from constant touring, man in a bright spotlight at the front of a world stage. It's Kathy's female tabloid tendency to pose herself as the one who was so close to Jimi as to know the real man - and perhaps some payback for leaving her as well. I'm fairly sure Jimi used heroin very infrequently and only recreationally and on rare occassion. To call him "heroin addicted" is false, as his autopsy showed.
If you read 'Through Gypsy Eyes' you'll find Kathy went over to New York in March 1969. When she got there she found Jimi besieged by an intense drug entourage. Her friends, including Angie Burdon, were now sniffing coke and heroin and were being absorbed by this 60's drug culture dependency. A drug dealer showed up at Jimi's hotel room with a briefcase full of white powder in packets with a handgun laid on top. He was a typical Manhattan mafioso drug dealer. Put-off by this scene and finding herself marginalized Kathy headed back to England. I suspect this experience is where she got her impression that lead her to say the things she did.
Kathy tended towards spite, to which we thankfully owe her pursuit of Monika Dannemann, without which we would have never known that Jimi was murdered.
The reason we are limited in information on what exactly happened to Hendrix is because the source is a female conflict between Hendrix girlfriends Kathy Etchingham and Monika Dannemann. So the matters they focus on tend to be those which accentuate their relationship to Jimi and its importance. Because of English libel laws, and the fact she was squared-off with Monika, Kathy limits her accusation to Monika and suggests Monika might have murdered Jimi. Unfortunately Kathy didn't dig deep enough as the 2009 admission of road crew member Tappy Wright, that he heard Hendrix's manager Michael Jeffery confess to murdering Jimi, shows. This lack of further investigation is probably due to libel laws and the fact you can't accuse people without proof in England. Those laws are what gave Kathy her power against Monika.
ReplyDeleteMonika Dannemann's background needs to be investigated. She only dated black musicians in Germany before meeting Hendrix. A white German girl who only liked black men was considered a psychological abnormality back in the 1960's. So it is possible Monika was being groomed as an intelligence infiltrator for Hendrix. Her relationship with Jimi was bizarre. Hendrix's friends said no one knew who she was. Research shows she met Jimi at a bar after a show in Germany in January 1969 and was only in contact with him for a few days. She later shows up in London a few days before Jimi's death. Dannemann said Jimi had proposed to her at their first meeting and kept in contact with her through letters and phone calls in the intervening 18 months, however Dannemann refused to ever produce those letters saying they were too personal.
An odd thing about their first meeting is that Jimi went right to the bar where Monika was sitting and sat right next to her. He then pointed out they shared the same identical large green jade stone in their jewelry. Jimi then proceeded to tell Monika she was his destiny and the fair-haired woman foretold to him by the gypsy. Was the jade stone a hypnotic trigger? Jimi was photographed wearing Monika's jade stone pendant the day he died and Monika was photographed wearing it to the Inquest.
There's a lot more to be written about Monika Dannemann and the provable lies she told about the morning of Jimi's death. Virtually every single thing she said about that morning has been proven to be lies. This is what led Kathy to sue her and research the evidence.
Eric Burdon also has a Hendrix skeleton looming in his closet. In his 1986 biography he admitted Monika called him to the Samarkand "at around daybreak". That would have been around 5:30am. Kathy was suing Monika because Monika claimed, right up to her death, that she called Eric after 11am. Eric admitted they stalled calling the ambulance because they wanted to clean the flat of drugs. But, as Hendrix guru Michael Fairchild first wrote in the 1990's, why did it take 5 hours to clean the flat of drugs? Indeed Monika's mind was so disarranged that she later admitted Hendrix crew members Stickells and Barret, who were called there by Burdon, were mostly interested in finding phones messages and office notes. In other words they were interested in hiding any connection to Jeffery.
The reason I suspect Monika's mind might have been tampered with was because she was openly speaking of cleaning the flat of drugs while calling Kathy a liar for mentioning it at the same time. If not, then Monika could have been cooperating either wittingly or unwittingly with Jeffery. There's a lot more to be written about Monika that space doesn't allow for here.
I've done a little looking into this case and I figure the reason Burdon didn't call an ambulance wasn't because of drugs in the flat but because he was aware Jeffery had murdered Hendrix. Burdon had Jeffery as a manager when he was in the Animals and knew what a bastard he was. I'm fairly confident Burdon knew right away what happened when he saw Jimi's body and that Monika might have even told him. So the confusion over why Burdon came out so strongly with the suicide claim is answered by the fact Burdon had knowledge enough to convict Jeffery. He saw the dangerousness of Jeffery before him in the form of Hendrix's murdered body, so he quickly went public with a claim of suicide in order to send the message to Jeffery that he would cover him. Burdon was trying to keep him and Monika from being killed. He knew Jeffery was MI-5 and mob-connected and there would probably be no point in trying to expose him.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile Kathy Etchingham has become the English diplomat for Hendrix and is called-upon for appearances and statements whenever Hendrix's name comes up. And although she was the one to instigate the investigation she now supports a version of Hendrix's death that makes it look like an accident due to Monika's negligence. This, to me, is an unforgivable betrayal - especially since the government she teams-up with in the awarding of Jimi with an official historical plaque in London is the same one that turned down any re-opening of the investigation into Jimi's murder. Shame on you Kathy. To me the plaque itself is a metal platter, which only cost the British Government a few pounds, on which Jimi's head is being served. Perhaps the plaque would be more appropriate on London's Tower wall?
Exiles, good to see you still around.
ReplyDeleteThere was more than the conflict between Dannemann and Etchingham. There was also the conflict between Monika and paramedics Jones and Saua and Dr. Bannister.
From my perspective, the relationship Hendrix had with both Etchingham and Dannemann bordered on intrigue (if not actually crossed over into). I wrote this over four years ago, so I don't know if here or elsewhere in this series I refered to Etchingham's book (specifically to the incident between her, Fayne Pridgeon and Jimi). But there are a lot of conflicting accounts of Hendrix' demeanor, his temper, his drug usage (it doesn't take anyone five hours to clean out drugs, unless he or she is in some kind of warehouse).
Your comment is speculative, of course, as are many of my contributions in this series (which people miss despite the fact that I clearly labelled them speculation). If I ever had a chance to investigate Hendrix's death, I would certainly keep your suggestions in mind. I cannot say your suppositions are incorrect. But intuitively, I feel that there's something deeper behind this, a complicated with complex, and oftentimes conflicting motivations, who don't always say what's on their minds.
Thanks for dropping by and ruminating.
I think you'll find that Monika had no direct conflict with the ambulance men or the doctors. All her conflicts were through Kathy and her libel suit. If it wasn't for Kathy's "cat fight" with Monika over who was the most accurate and legitimate Hendrix girlfriend Monika might have gotten away with her story.
ReplyDeleteWhen you say Etchingham's relationship with Hendrix bordered on intrigue I assume you're referring to Kathy's violent drug addict Hendrix claims. However, if you research Kathy's background and personality I think you'll find it was mostly due to Kathy's tabloid nature and perhaps a little spitefulness over her losing Jimi to other women. Again, if it wasn't for Kathy's proactive spite she probably never would have forced the murder evidence into visibility. I seriously doubt Kathy was tied into any COINTELPRO character defamation (at least not directly). Kathy was the honest and open one (too honest) and Monika was the deceptive liar. And this is what caused their conflict.
It's my personal opinion that my information is well beyond the "speculation" phase. I think if you research it deeper you'll find everything I've written to have truth behind it. The remarks of Kathy Etchingham that Hendrix was a crazed, violent drug abuser are simply exaggerations due to Kathy's being marginalized in Hendrix's life and seeking to put herself forward in the Hendrix spotlight as someone who knew the real Hendrix. Kathy, unfortunately, had a tabloidistic ego that she let loose in public and didn't have the sense to see how it could be used by Hendrix's enemies to damage him.
In the overall scheme of things this incident is just a minor footnote in Hendrix history. What is much more important and relevant is the fact Jimi Hendrix was most likely murdered by a CIA COINTELPRO assassination operation. THAT is what people should be looking in to and writing about. At the risk of presumption, I can assure you the reason you feel there is something more involved is because there is and it is very creepy. And I think I can show the evidence for it. This is well beyond 'speculation' at this point IMO.
X Dell:
ReplyDeleteI assume you also know that Hendrix road crew member Tappy Wright came out in June 2009 with the claim he witnessed Michael Jeffery confess he had murdered Hendrix?
Your writings here are good and thought-provoking, but they are of the Constantine generation that has had more happen since then.
Jeffery's confession is questionable. Jeffery said he broke into Monika's flat with some "Old London Colleagues" (MI-5?) and shoved pills down Hendrix's throat followed by wine. Well, Monika's flat showed no signs of forced entry. Nor could Jeffery have "shoved pills down Hendrix's throat followed by wine" because the autopsy showed Jimi's barbiturate blood level to be 3.9mg percent. It can be scientifically determined how long it would have taken Jimi's blood level to reach 3.9mg. I would assume about an hour or less. So there's no way Jeffery shoved any pills down Hendrix's throat followed by wine because they would have necessary been vomited right back up after Jimi was waterboarded to death with wine shortly after. Jimi took those pills on his own thinking they were Tuinols. He was recorded as telling his New York doctor that there were some "Tuinols" at the Samarkand he intended to take for his insomnia.
I believe the reason Jeffery told Wright he broke-in and shoved pills down Jimi's throat is because he was a shrewd MI-5 disinformationist with some heavy heat on him. It is more likely Jeffery either let himself in with a key or Monika let him in (most likely the latter). It's even possible Jeffery wasn't even there. In any case, it doesn't matter because we know Jimi was murdered from the medical forensics, as well as the criminal forensics and circumstantial evidence.
I did read the Etchingham book shortly befrore posting this series. I also wanted to get my hands on Monika's book, but prices were going for $100 and more at Amazon.
ReplyDeleteI guess, in a way, we're sort of quibbling how we perceived Kathy. I don't mean "intrigue" in the sense of involvment with clandestine forces (although I certainly wouldn't rule it out). Rather, I mean that it is enigmatic, and could POSSIBLY have some connection to intel (either wittingly or unwittingly; for example, if Danneman were heavily influenced by Burdon, who is in turn manipulated by Jeffery, then that could possibly make it intriguing in the conspiracy sense).
As I have said earlier, I'm not sure of what to make of Tappy Wright just yet. One thing I've learned over years of looking into questions such as this is that the lone statement, often given from secret sources, can just as well mislead as it does inform. It's not that I dismiss it. On the other hand, I don't jump all over it. I simply say, "that's interesting," and see where it fits with new information and old.
After all, what might shed light on Hendrix' death and others isn't single "clues" or testimonies, but rather a preponderance of evidence. Call me old-fashioned if you will, the fact is I can see how this stacks up with varying standards of proof. I'm also not as quick as you to see new evidence as fact. And unlike Constantine, I'm not out to prove that there was an official policy of murder against rock stars, per se, but simply what happened. Even if it turned out that there was not foul play in Hendrix' death, that wouldn't shoot Constantine (nor Brussells') contention out of the water.
BTW, Danneman told the Daily Sketch one week after his death that She was (1) there when paramedics arrived (over her course of telling the story, the time it took for them to get there varied between nine and twenty minutes--in this interview she said twenty), and (2) that Hendrix was very much alive when the paramedics came (she kept taking his pulse). She characterized him as mostly clean, but with a bit of "sick" on his nose. She told the Daily Mail a few days earlier that she rode with him in the ambulance.
But Jones and Saua say (1) they came to an empty apartment, with no hide nor hair of Dannemann, (2) it was obvious to them that he was dead, for he was cold, and showed no signs of life, and (3) that his hair was matted with red wine, and that he was generally a mess.
Now if that doesn't strike you as conflict, then that's your business. Otherwise, I feel perfectly fine sayng that these competing descriptions of Hendrix' death are major conflicts.
I appreciate your replies on this because it is extremely difficult to get a conversation going on this in public. There needs to be a credible Hendrix Murder board somewhere.
ReplyDeleteI got Monika's book 'Inner World Of Jimi Hendrix' for around $35 used. I think it's a collector's item because of its notoriousness.
As far as Dannemann I think you are misinterpreting what I'm saying. From what you wrote you made it sound like Monika had a direct conflict with the ambulance men and doctors as if she was confronting them in person. What I meant was Monika was confronted on her erroneous information only through Kathy and her libel suit. There's no doubt whatsoever that Monika's -story- had fatal conflicts with the facts presented by all others concerning that morning. It was partly the reason why Kathy sued and challenged her in public. Monika was protected by squirrely English libel laws, which is why she got away with her story for so long. She made the fatal mistake of suing Noel Redding because he mentioned Monika neglected Jimi that morning and contributed to his death. If Monika wasn't so aggressive and ignored it she never would have spurred Kathy to go out and interview all those involved, including the ambulance men and doctors. So we are definitely on the same page there.
If you'll allow me I'll cut right to the chase on Monika's story: I believe Monika was somehow fooled into letting Jeffery (or his thugs) into the flat that night. How Jimi got the 9 Vesparax into him is unknown, however it is possible he took them on his own. Monika was seen desperately trying to get Jimi out of the Pete Cameron party around 2:30am. She repeatedly called on the intercom so much that the party goers created an ugly scene and hung out the windows telling her to "go away, Jimi doesn't want you here". Finally Jimi relented and left with her at around 3am. So from Monika's behavior it is possible she was desperate to get Jimi out because she had an arrangement with Jeffery to get Jimi back to the Samarkand.
The forensics are critical here because while you suggest there was a possible scenario where no foul play was involved the forensics actually preclude that and prove no other scenario was possible but murder. The stomach rice contents are conclusive. Jimi was seen eating that rice at the Cameron party at around midnight. Since it takes 4-5 hours for the stomach to digest its contents the whole rice grains found by the autopsist prove Jimi died at around 4-4:30am. This is in perfect synch with Jimi getting back to the Samarkand at around 3am, and settling-in, and taking 9 Vesparax. The forensic evidence indicates Jimi took the Vesparax around 3:30am and reached a blood barbiturate level of 3.9mg at the time of death. This barbiturate absorption rate is scientifically determinable. I'll guess offhand that it was around an hour after taking the tablets that Jimi reached the 3.9mg barbiturate blood level. Jimi was therefore passed-out.
When Jimi died he locked-in a 5mg/100ml blood alcohol level. So a clock started ticking backwards at that point for the minimum amount of time needed to have a 5mg/100ml blood alcohol level. This is a low level of blood alcohol content. The time is fairly short, so Jimi was most definitely passed-out at the point of time on the forensic graph that would have necessitated a 5mg/100ml blood alcohol content. And people who are passed-out cannot administer "bottles worth" of wine into themselves as Doctor Bannister witnessed. This is irrefutable, unquestionable forensic evidence of waterboarding murder. It can't be any other way. The forensic evidence disallows any possible non-foul play scenario.
There's a simple way to approach Tappy Wright. Arrange to have Wright cooperate in an expert polygraph where it is established he is telling the truth about Michael Jeffery telling him he waterboarded Hendrix to death. Once you determine Wright is reasonably telling the truth it proves he heard Jeffery specifically mention the waterboarding method of murder in 1973.
ReplyDeleteThe reason this is important is because it would show that Doctor Bannister could not have gotten his waterboarding evidence from Wright since Wright came out with it in 2009 and never mentioned it to anyone before that.
By isolating Wright specifically hearing of the waterboarding method in February 1973 it shows that Doctor Bannister also witnessed evidence of waterboarding murder separately on September 18th 1970 at St Mary Abott's Hospital.
Two separate and unrelated witnessings of evidence are usually taken as valid legal evidence by courts. So once you reasonably establish by lie detector test that Wright heard Jeffery mention waterboarding in 1973 that constitutes legal cross reference or separately-witnessed evidence. That is usually the accepted threshold for valid legal evidence.
Monika is partly telling the truth about "being there" when the ambulance arrived. However she was not actually at the flat itself but was across the street at a pay phone with Burdon instead. The investigation discovered that the phone call for the ambulance originated at the pay phone across the street from Monika's flat. Have no doubt Burdon and Monika did this exactly because they needed the correct space between them and any investigating authorities that would pin them down to exact evidence and times. They were very definitely trying to avoid disclosing their knowledge of Jeffery's murder of Hendrix. Have no doubt.
The reason Monika stuck with her already-proven lies about that morning was because she knew that once she veered from them she would be trapped into revealing what actually happened. And what actually happened was Jeffery murdered Hendrix and Monika knew about it. Monika's death, whether by suicide or being 'suicided', ultimately resulted from this. And there you have it.
What's really bizarre about Monika is the reason she was so litigious and proactive in defending herself and her story from that morning is because she knew the real reason. She knew Jeffery murdered Hendrix and that's why she sued Noel Redding after he wrote she had neglected Jimi that morning and allowed him to die. She sued because of the injustice she felt over the accusation but couldn't say directly what happened.
ReplyDeleteI think I've figured Monika out. She really did have a genuine relationship with Jimi where he told her his inner secrets and proposed to her in his own weird way. She was either told to go out and get some cigarettes while Jeffery and his boys "talked" to Jimi or she was there. I think she was there because she told stories of watching the ambulance men tip Jimi's head back and prevent him from vomiting. I think Monika was actually describing something she witnessed at the Samarkand when she said that.
So having witnessed Jimi's murder but being unable to talk she then proceeded to legally defend herself vigorously against all those who questioned her story. Eventually Kathy got the upper hand because Monika could not defend her lies. Monika was in a doomed catch-22 position. She was innocent of what she was being accused of but couldn't defend the lies she used to cover-up what actually happened. Monika either committed suicide or was murdered herself by the same forces that murdered Jimi right before being forced into court where she would have lost her libel law protections.
People have to understand a basic thing about the murder scene. The profuse vomit from the shoulders up that the ambulance men witnessed was the condition Jimi was in when he died. For people who don't understand these forensics let me explain them. The "horrific" vomit the ambulance men witnessed covering Jimi was a bodily reaction to be drowned in wine. Jimi vomited-out when he was waterboarded to death with wine. Monika had to make-up the trickle of vomit running down his chin story because she knew she could not claim she was sleeping right next to Jimi while he was vomiting profusely. Monika later fatally-contradicted her trickle of vomit claim when she said "Jimi was a mess". She was referring to the "horrific" vomit the ambulance men witnessed.
So now that we understand that Jimi died when he vomited profusely we can see that Monika called Burdon at 5:30am or earlier - which means Jimi was dead when Monika called. There's a basic thing that people seem to miss here. Jimi died when he vomited. Monika reacted to this by calling for help. This all happened before 5:30am according to all known evidence. Monika's story of Jimi being alive up to when the ambulance came at 11:30am is complete bullsh*t. Jimi was dead at around 4:30am when Monika witnessed Jeffery murder him.
The proof all those involved knew Jimi was murdered is captured by the fact that the ambulance men found Jimi on his back dead and covered in vomit. What this shows is no one tried to help him by wiping the vomit off him or rolling him over and slapping the vomit out of his throat. The position the ambulance men found Jimi in tells you the people who found him that way knew he was dead and that there was no point in helping him. So they left him lie just like he was. Those people; Monika Dannemann, Eric Burdon, Terry Slater, Eric Barret, and Gerry Stickells all knew Jimi was dead - and most likely knew Jeffery had murdered him. Otherwise they would have tried to help him. The forensic scene speaks for itself.
Monika then calls Burdon and they cook-up the official story that the official Inquest then accepts without question (even though there's huge holes in it even a child could see) and uses it to determine their official verdict.
"I know I've gotta die, when it's time for me to die - So let me live my life the way I want to!"
ReplyDeletejimi hendrix
(i know i gotta live, if its time 4 me 2 live - so let me die my death the way i want 2...)
...and let him Rest In Peace!
Hello, Anonymous, welcome to the X-Spot.
ReplyDeleteTrust me, I have no intention of digging Jimi up.
Hello, Gabylan. Welcome to The X-Spot. Thanks for the link.
ReplyDeleteHe wasn't violent. See Kathy Etchingham's interview regarding the 2013 Jimi: All is by my side film:
ReplyDelete"But the worst part about it is, because there is no music in it, they had to introduce some kind of, what they call, “Hollywood jerks” for the audience. So he used domestic violence, and it didn’t happen.
He’s said that he’s researched it, and that it’s well documented and that he’s had a fact checker. The fact checker’s never been in contact with me either. They just didn’t want to know that it wasn’t true. I think the age that we are living in now, compared to back in the 60’s, to put domestic violence on the silver screen for entertainment is appalling. He ought to be ashamed of himself."
As far as the sleeping pills that he took, Monika Dannemann told him that they were very very weak, when in fact they were double dose pills (you're supposed to take a half pill)
and the medication instructions were written in German. A Scotland Yard inquest said he
took at most 5 pills (even though Dannemann said he took 9 and kept changing her story). Dannemann ending up committing suicide in 1996 after it was proven that some of her statements regarding Hendrix were lies. https://medium.com/cuepoint/she-was-by-his-side-7596a79d66f9