Hendrix's last days reveal possible clues!

So I've always been bit of a Hendrix fan, and since the beginning quite suspicious about the events surrounding his death. Statements from his girlfriend at the time contradicted the official reports of ambulance and hospital personel, and Hendrix was found with a stomach full of red wine (yet low blood alcohol levels) and partially-dissolved Vesperex tablets. Very fishy.

Years later, Danneman claimed that former roadies Gerry Stickels and Eric Barrett had been present before the ambulance was called, and had removed some of Hendrix's possessions - including some of his most recent messages. After a bit of digging, I found out that two weeks before his death, at his final concert (Isle of Fehmarn, Germany), Stickels had stormed the box office and attempted to shut the show down. Stickels heckeled the guitarist, and Jimi announced to the crowd that Stickels and Garrett were lovers. A gang of Hells Angels harrassed and attacked the crowd, and one of Hendrix's roadies, Rocky, was shot in the leg. The band fled the set. Photos of Hendrix days before the concert show him with a pistol, indicating that he afraid for his life even before the clash with Stickels.

Why would Stickels and Barrett be so interested in Hendrix's communications in the days leading up to his death? Were they afraid of being implicated?

No doubt, manager Michael Jeffreys would also benefit more with Hendrix dead than alive, so his involvement shouldn't be ruled out, certainly. But the additional evidence of the former roadies' actions does raise some compelling questions, I think.

Hendrix probably didn't die of an overdose of sleeping pills. My opinion is that he was likely injected with a sedative and then force-fed sleeping pills and wine, and then smothered by his assailants.

If all of this had come to light sooner, I think that something would have been done to vindicate the poor fellow. Now, everyone of significance is either dead or obscure, and the chances of clearing his name grow ever slim. Like Jimi used to say - It's such a shame!

I don't know who his name needs to be cleared with -- if you are a Hendrix fan, you probably know the story, and IMO a famous (drug using hippie) black artist choking on his own vomit in an ambulance, with the attendants present, in 1971, is enough to cast doubt on the "accidental" nature of the event.

If you are not a fan, who really cares?

That said, if you are now or have ever been a drug user of any merit :p, you also are aware that it is not always a 100% safe activity and prone to unfortunate, often foolish, sometimes fatal error. So it's sad, but to me it is exactly the same as someone dying while mountain climbing or skiing or kayaking* -- which no doubt are also prone to unfortunate, often foolish, sometimes fatal errors. Unfamiliar prescription drugs can be a real wildcard, etc. These risks are not downplayed or denied in any of those activites, AFAICT, and I do not think any the less of Hendrix even if he did kill himself by mistake (nor of Coltrane, and so on). The vast majority of drug users are not killed doing it.

So I don't see any possibility for meaningful "vindication" here. It won't bring him back to life, and the Vatican is not going to Saint him even if you could prove he was murdered. I guess if he was murdered, you could bring those responsible to justice, but that is *extremely far-fetched*, so all that muck raking would accomplish here is well -- muck raking. Do I want to smear the name of some HA (or paramedic, or whoever) just because I think they might have been responsible for killing Hendrix? Those people have had almost 40 more years to prove that they are human vermin, if it's true no doubt many people around them have already noticed. And many many much more heinous unresolved crimes have happened since then, too.** Nothing that special about this one. If you want to blame anything, blame prohibition.

* eg, if someone is killed skiing they are, to a not insignificant degree, responsible for their own deaths regardless of the particular circumstances. Same thing IN A CAR (almost). Cars are obviously not 100% safe and any sane adult knows this before they get in. Do we need to "vindicate" John Denver by proving someone sabotaged his plane?

** eg, if I had air support and ammunition, I'd be "asking questions -- later" right now in Plateau State, Nigeria

>> I don't know who his name needs to be cleared with -- if you are a Hendrix fan, you probably know the story, and IMO a famous (drug using hippie) black artist choking on his own vomit in an ambulance, with the attendants present, in 1971, is enough to cast doubt on the "accidental" nature of the event.

Nope. According to paramedics on the scene, the apartment was empty and Hendrix appeared to have been dead for quite some time (not just a couple of hours). His girlfriend's statements, again, were inconsistent and contradictory.

>> That said, if you are now or have ever been a drug user of any merit , you also are aware that it is not always a 100% safe activity and prone to unfortunate, often foolish, sometimes fatal error. So it's sad, but to me it is exactly the same as someone dying while mountain climbing or skiing or kayaking -- which no doubt are also prone to unfortunate, often foolish, sometimes fatal errors. Unfamiliar prescription drugs can be a real wildcard, etc. These risks are not downplayed or denied in any of those activites, AFAICT, and I do not think any the less of Hendrix even if he did kill himself by mistake (nor of Coltrane, and so on). The vast majority of drug users are not killed doing it.

Hendrix did push the limits with drugs at times, but really, what has that got to do with it? The doctor who initially examined his body concluded that his death seemed suspicious. Two people who are known enemies of Hendrix turn out to be present at the location of his death. I would think an experienced detective would be inclined to take a closer look at those individuals, personally.

>> So I don't see any possibility for meaningful "vindication" here. It won't bring him back to life, and the Vatican is not going to Saint him even if you could prove he was murdered.

Who's said he was a saint?* Look. He was a talented musician. A composer. He accompished much in his short lifetime, and I think his legacy (whatever that may be) should be respected.

>> I guess if he was murdered, you could bring those responsible to justice, but that is *extremely far-fetched*, so all that muck raking would accomplish here is well -- muck raking. Do I want to smear the name of some HA (or paramedic, or whoever) just because I think they might have been responsible for killing Hendrix?

Noone ever eluded to that except for the girlfriend, who later recanted that from her story, btw.

>> Those people have had almost 40 more years to prove that they are human vermin, if it's true no doubt many people around them have already noticed. And many many much more heinous unresolved crimes have happened since then, too. Nothing that special about this one.

IMO every murder is special and significant. If you don't want to care about those who are viciously murdered by thugs or madmen, suit yourself. It happens every day, after all. Who cares?

*More like God of Psychedelic Jazz Rock. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebastiani

Nope. According to paramedics on the scene, the apartment was empty and Hendrix appeared to have been dead for quite some time (not just a couple of hours). His girlfriend's statements, again, were inconsistent and contradictory.

---

Alright. Dunno where I got that story, but I have read it a few times (I suppose it all comes from this desire to "vindicate" someone, in someone else's eyes). It also hinges on Hendrix using European sleeping pills that were 4x as potent per unit as what he was used to. Maybe that's true, maybe it's not. Maybe his girlfriend was not a murderer, but felt guilty somehow and wanted to conceal some detail -- who knows? Same with his friends/staff.

I'm not a particular Heath Ledger fan, but I remember thinking, sheesh, WTF, how do you do a stupid thing like that? Here's my theory: he's young, he's got tons of cash, he likes to get high. When you're young and adventurous and can afford it (in terms of time, money, circumstances), you can develop some dangerous attitudes there. It's the wild wild west! Like, I've been up for a few days now on stimulants and psychedelics (coke, E, speed, acid, shrooms, etc -- a special weekend ;)) and I want to chill out for a while, come down, get some rest. So, thankfully, I also have a box of vicodin and a stocked bar (you're Heath Ledger: how does "anything" sound?). This is when your guard is down: the "blow your head" style activity is over, you're at home, gonna sleep, nothing to worry about. But altho your body has really been taxed, you're used to this. Hey, you've been doing it for (a few) years! You don't need to get paranoid or pussyfoot around....just chill :( Hendrix's star-level career was actually quite short.

Quote:

---

Hendrix did push the limits with drugs at times, but really, what has that got to do with it? The doctor who initially examined his body concluded that his death seemed suspicious. Two people who are known enemies of Hendrix turn out to be present at the location of his death. I would think an experienced detective would be inclined to take a closer look at those individuals, personally.

---

Yeah. I used to live in an SRO district where the 300-400 people a year died, year after year, from heroin overdoses -- out of a population of 15,000. That's a real lot; there are not many (probably: not any) other neighbourhoods that small where someone ODs everyday. Most of them died (or were found) "alone in their rooms". I'm sure most of those were accidental, but it was a little frightening, because of course there is no way anyone is going to investigate the overdose death of a destitute junkie found in his room.

The year I was there, there was a lot of talk about "missing prostitutes", which I didn't make much of either. Then right after I left two brothers from the suburbs were found with 25 heads kept from the abduction and murder of prostitutes from the same neighbourhood. Last I heard they were suspected in the disappearance of twice that number. Spooky. Nasty.

Quote:

---

>> So I don't see any possibility for meaningful "vindication" here. It won't bring him back to life, and the Vatican is not going to Saint him even if you could prove he was murdered.

Who's said he was a saint? Look. He was a talented musician. A composer. He accompished much in his short lifetime, and I think his legacy (whatever that may be) should be respected.

---

Yes, and he is. My point was just that people who have less respect for him because he supposedly overdosed himself probably did not have that much respect to start with or need to check their own heads. (I was just responding to your use of "vindicate" -- why do you see this as shaming? What if it was a car crash?* To me, "IF SIX TURNS OUT TO BE NINE" is a pretty good indicator that Hendrix would not desire this kind of "vindication". He's dead!).

Quote:

---

IMO every murder is special and significant. If you don't want to care about those who are viciously murdered by thugs or madmen, suit yourself. It happens every day, after all. Who cares?

---

It's not that I don't care, I'm just not sure if I see a purpose in me being concerned in this sense. If he was murdered, there is nothing I can do about it, and it really makes no difference to my appreciation of his life and art. Again -- if you are feeling righteous, get righteous about drug prohibition. It's a crock, it only contributes to death and mayhem, and the only people who benefit are redneck prison guards.

* I'm very rarely in them, and when I am, all I can think is: this is an insanely stupid thing to do. You're just asking for problems (on many levels).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebastiani

Hendrix was found with a stomach full of red wine (yet low blood alcohol levels) and partially-dissolved Vesperex tablets. Very fishy.

---

It would make sense to have low blood alcohol since apparently he didn't digest the wine but I could be missing something obvious.

>> The year I was there, there was a lot of talk about "missing prostitutes", which I didn't make much of either. Then right after I left two brothers from the suburbs were found with 25 heads kept from the abduction and murder of prostitutes from the same neighbourhood. Last I heard they were suspected in the disappearance of twice that number. Spooky. Nasty.

Exactly. Someone needs to stand up for these poor souls!

>>Yes, and he is. My point was just that people who have less respect for him because he supposedly overdosed himself probably did not have that much respect to start with or need to check their own heads.
>> It's not that I don't care, I'm just not sure if I see a purpose in me being concerned in this sense. If he was murdered, there is nothing I can do about it, and it really makes no difference to my appreciation of his life and art.

I get your point there. Even so, the circumstances of his death should be examined, I think.

>>Again -- if you are feeling righteous, get righteous about drug prohibition. It's a crock, it only contributes to death and mayhem, and the only people who benefit are redneck prison guards.

I really don't see what this has to do with drug prohibition. I'm just saying that if Hendrix was murdered then the perpetrators should be brought to justice. Simple as that. And even if that isn't possible, we can still set the record straight. Right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiteflags

It would make sense to have low blood alcohol since apparently he didn't digest the wine but I could be missing something obvious.

---

This is correct, as far as I know.
Liquids are indeed partially absorbed in the stomach but at a much slower rate than the smaller intestine. Something like 10x slower. Alcohol is thus partially absorbed in the stomach but most of it will be absorbed in the smaller intestine. So if he had a stomach full of red wine, it is acceptable he still had low or no alcohol in his blood.

Interestingly enough, liquids take only around 15 minutes to leave the stomach. If he had no wine in his smaller intestine, it's a pretty safe bet it was taken up to 15 minutes prior to his death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebastiani

I get your point there. Even so, the circumstances of his death should be examined, I think.

---

Naturally. Even more so because murder doesn't lapse. If there could be found new evidence pointing to a murder case, the law establishes the murderer should pay for this crime even if they are 99 years old and have saved the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiteflags

It would make sense to have low blood alcohol since apparently he didn't digest the wine but I could be missing something obvious.

---

It takes time to drink an entire bottle of wine (Hendrix had roughly that much on his persons). As each glass is consumed, BA levels rise. That wasn't what happened here. About a third of it was found, undigested, in his stomach, more than a quarter remained in his lungs, and almost half in his hair. Very little was absorbed. The sleeping tablets were only partially digested, as well. So, either he gobbled up nine Vesperex tablets and chased them with a whole bottle of wine (unlikely, IMO)...or someone else did it for him...