It seems like yesterday.
 

Today, Wednesdsay 8th December is the 30th
anniversary of the assassination of John Lennon,
murdered outside the Dakota building by Mark
Chapman.

Iain

It seems like yesterday.
 

In article , Iain Churches
wrote:
Today, Wednesdsay 8th December is the 30th anniversary of the
assassination of John Lennon, murdered outside the Dakota building by
Mark Chapman.

At the time and since, I've had the wish that people would cease mentioning
the name of the killer. This is to discourage the idea that someone can
become 'famous' by killing someone else who is well-regarded. So I welcome
your reminder of the anniversary, but wish you hadn't mentioned the
killer's name.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

It seems like yesterday.
 

I still don't understand quite why he did it either. Was he paid by the
secretive 7?
Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...
Today, Wednesdsay 8th December is the 30th
anniversary of the assassination of John Lennon,
murdered outside the Dakota building by Mark
Chapman.

Iain

It seems like yesterday.
 

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
I still don't understand quite why he did it either. Was he paid by the
secretive 7?
Brian


It is clear that Nixon regarded Lennon as a threat,
in his role as a popular and outspoken peace activist.
Perhaps, who knows?

Iain

It seems like yesterday.
 

On 08/12/2010 10:27, Iain Churches wrote:
"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
I still don't understand quite why he did it either. Was he paid by the
secretive 7?
Brian


It is clear that Nixon regarded Lennon as a threat,
in his role as a popular and outspoken peace activist.
Perhaps, who knows?

But what about Jimmy Carter? I prefer Brian's Secret Seven theory.
That Enid Blyton has a lot to answer for....

--
Eiron.

It seems like yesterday.
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote

At the time and since, I've had the wish that people would cease
mentioning
the name of the killer. This is to discourage the idea that someone can
become 'famous' by killing someone else who is well-regarded. So I welcome
your reminder of the anniversary, but wish you hadn't mentioned the
killer's name.


I've heard the suggestion made that that was, in fact, the motivation of
John Lennon's killer. It certainly seems to me to be an infinitely more
likely cause than that this murder was the result of a politically-inspired
conspiracy.

David.

It seems like yesterday.
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Iain Churches
wrote:
Today, Wednesdsay 8th December is the 30th anniversary of the
assassination of John Lennon, murdered outside the Dakota building by
Mark Chapman.

At the time and since, I've had the wish that people would cease
mentioning
the name of the killer. This is to discourage the idea that someone can
become 'famous' by killing someone else who is well-regarded. So I welcome
your reminder of the anniversary, but wish you hadn't mentioned the
killer's name.

Understood. But....

A full-length documetary, a personal profile on the killer
whose name you would prefer not to be mentioned,
is to be networked in the US to mark the 30th anniversary
of this tragic event. It will probably also be shown within
the EBU, and so an audience of several hundred million
will see it, and know the name, if they do not already.

The final act of this drama is still to come, when Chapman
finally gets parole, and puts his name to a version of what
may, or may not be the truth, in a multi-million best seller.

There was a story some ten years ago, when she contested
the first parole application, that Ms Ono was applying for a
court injunction to prevent Chapman selling his story.

I cannot recall reading whether or not her application
was successful.

I noticed as I was coming out of the Conservatory of
Music yesterday evening, there were two youngish
musicians going in, both wearing black arm bands.
This may have been totally unconnected to the Lennon
tragedy, but somehow I don't think so.

Iain

It seems like yesterday.
 

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Jim Lesurf" wrote

At the time and since, I've had the wish that people would cease
mentioning
the name of the killer. This is to discourage the idea that someone can
become 'famous' by killing someone else who is well-regarded. So I
welcome
your reminder of the anniversary, but wish you hadn't mentioned the
killer's name.


I've heard the suggestion made that that was, in fact, the motivation of
John Lennon's killer.

One of the psychiatrists who examined him suggested the
possibility that Chapman was trying to preserve Lennon's
innocence, even into immortality, by killing him.

It certainly seems to me to be an infinitely more
likely cause than that this murder was the result of a
politically-inspired conspiracy.

Indeed. It is well-known that Nixon feared Lennon's
popularity and his contrasting views.

But, do you think, if that had been the case, that they would
not have "tied up the loose ends"? Leaving the killer alive to
later spill the beans would surely not be in the best interests
of the conspirators.

It seems like yesterday.
 

In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

The final act of this drama is still to come, when Chapman finally gets
parole, and puts his name to a version of what may, or may not be the
truth, in a multi-million best seller.

I'm nor sure of this, but in the UK I think there is a law that forbids
criminals from making a profit of this kind from their criminal behaviour.

Finding that a murderer not only becomes famous but wealthy as a direct
result of their crime does seem a disgrace to me. Particularly when that
may have been the aim of the actual crime. But I guess this is par for the
course in our modern 'western' societies.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

It seems like yesterday.
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

The final act of this drama is still to come, when Chapman finally gets
parole, and puts his name to a version of what may, or may not be the
truth, in a multi-million best seller.

I'm nor sure of this, but in the UK I think there is a law that forbids
criminals from making a profit of this kind from their criminal behaviour.

I am sure that is true. Gone are the days when a villain could sell the
gory details of nefarious deeds to to the highest bidder among the
Sunday papers.


Finding that a murderer not only becomes famous but wealthy as a direct
result of their crime does seem a disgrace to me. Particularly when that
may have been the aim of the actual crime. But I guess this is par for the
course in our modern 'western' societies.

It would indeed be a disgrace.
Fortunately Ms Ono is able enough to hire the best attorneys
that money can buy. Let's hope they will prevail, if existing legislation
is not already in place.

Iain