The Wall Of Sound Remains Unbreached -
Robert Hillburn/LA Times on Mick Brown's "book"
Eu penso que eu matei alguém
'I think I killed somebody'
Mick Brown
12:04AM GMT 12 Mar 2007
Audio: The Spector Tapes
Later this month, Phil Spector, one of pop music's greatest producers, creator of the Wall of Sound and records such as You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin', will stand trial in Los Angeles for the murder of B-movie actress Lana Clarkson.
The long-delayed case is certain to rival the O J Simpson trial in terms of courtroom drama, a hearing that will shine a light into the darkest corners of a life touched by genius, but afflicted by insecurity, failed relationships, heavy drinking, an obsession with guns and explosive losses of temper.
I TEND TO DOUBT IT WILL RIVAL OJ BUT DOMINICK DUNNE'S COVERAGE HERE IS PATHETIC. FAILED RELATIONSHIPS? WELL, THERE WAS VERONICA SPECTOR WHO EVIDENTLY
WASN'T AN APPROPRIATE WITNESS FOR THE DA. ODD. NEITHER WAS DEBORAH HARRY. STRANGE. MARKY RAMONE. RETRACTED THE STORIES. LEONARD COHEN. GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE GRAND JURY BUT NOT A JURY TRIAL? SEEMS SUSPECT. I'VE NEVER SEEN PHILLIP DRINK HEAVILY. HE HAS NO OBSESSION WITH GUNS BUT THE GOLD DIGGERS UNDERSTAND HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS - CALL A COP, LIE, HAVE THEM TAKE A REPORT, AND - WHEN NECESSARY - HEAD INTO COURT. OF COURSE THESE GOLD DIGGERS FORGOT TO FILE REPORTS AT THE TIME SO THEY ARE PROBABLY ENTIRELY FRAUDULENT AND FICTIONAL. THIS LINE OF THINKING WILL NOT WORK FOR MICK BROWN'S BOOK OR THE ANGLE HE APPEARS TO BE TAKING.
In the Saturday magazine, we published the first exclusive extract from Mick Brown's new biography of Spector, in which he traced the origins of his demons and dreams. In this compelling second instalment, he examines the events leading up to Lana's death - a death, Spector claims, that was the result of accident or suicide.
THE TELEGRAPH IS CLEAR ABOUT THEIR MOTIVE AND ATTEMPTING TO HELP MICK BROWN SELL BOOKS AT THE SAME TIME. THEY APPEAR TO KNOW LANA PERSONALLY BUT NOT
SPECTOR. NOT ONLY DOES SPECTOR CLAIM IT WAS AN ACCIDENT OR SUICIDE - IT WAS. INCONVENIENT AND GETS IN THE WAY OF SALACIOUS REPORTING ON THE PART OF THE TELEGRAPH.
It's an old axiom that actresses die twice in Hollywood, the first time around their mid-thirties, when they can no longer pretend to play young.
Related Articles
I WOULD ASSUME THAT WHEN YOU'RE OVER 40 AND NEVER REALLY HAD A CAREER YOU MIGHT WANT TO GIVE UP THE ILLUSION THAT YOU'RE AN ACTRESS.
10 March 2007: Mick Brown: Spector's dreams and demons
12 Mar 2007
8 February 2005: The Spector Trial
12 Mar 2007
At the age of 40, Lana Clarkson, an actress who had appeared in 15 movies and countless TV shows, had hit a lean time in her career, and was trying to get back on her feet.
PRIMARILY BARBARIAN QUEEN. NOT SURE THAT'S A MOVIE, HOWEVER.
For Lana, 2002 had been a particularly difficult year. The roles that had made her a minor cult star in her twenties, and sustained her through her early thirties, had all but dried up.
She had been named after the Hollywood movie star Lana Turner, a fact that seemed to set her destiny in stone.
Growing up in California's Napa Valley, she dreamt of being an entertainer, and when the family moved to Los Angeles in 1978, when Lana was 16, she began a career in acting and modelling.
DID MICK BROWN FIND THE STORY I DID - ABOUT LANA CLARKSON'S FAMILY LIVING IN A COMMUNE IN CALIFORNIA WHERE SHE WAS FED THE MEAT OF HER CHILDHOOD PONY?
SOUNDS LIKE PEOPLE WERE ON LSD AT THAT COMMUNE.
At 20 she made her film debut in Fast Times at Ridgemont High, playing the role of a geekish schoolteacher's improbably beautiful wife. She had one line of dialogue: "Hi..."
SO DID REBECCA DEMORNAY - COHEN'S INCREDIBLY ANNOYING EX.
Her big break came in 1985, in Barbarian Queen, as Amethea, a warrior in a fur leotard, leading a slave uprising.
I DON'T KNOW IF I WOULD VIEW THIS AS A BIG BREAK. IT LOOKED LIKE IT MIGHT BE AN ENTRY TO THE PORN INDUSTRY.
It was a part the statuesque Lana seemed made for, and became the passport to a succession of similarly low-budget films, such as Amazon Women on the Moon and The Empress Strikes Back, which brought her a large and devoted fan base.
Semi-nudity was an almost obligatory requirement of such films, but Lana was never comfortable with it. ]
SURE. DID SOMEONE HOLD A GUN TO HER HEAD?
According to her friend, the celebrity hairstylist Eric Root, Lana "wanted to be a superstar. And she was gorgeous enough."
BEAUTY'S RELATIVE AND WHAT ELSE WOULD HER HAIRDRESSER SAY? HE WAS PART OF HER IMAGE.
Her dream of fame is the oldest story in Hollywood. She worshipped the twin doomed deities of Elvis and Marilyn Monroe, and collected Monroe memorabilia, covering her walls with pictures of the star.
ACTUALLY CORRUPTION AND LA CONFIDENTIAL STORIES ARE SOME OF THE OLDEST IN HOLLYWOOD. ELVIS AND MARILYN WEREN'T DEITIES AND NEITHER IS JIHAD GIANELLI'S
DOG WHO SHITS OR VOMITS ON PUJAS AND HAS IT OUT FOR SHARMAPA - ANOTHER TARGET OF MICK BROWN'S WHO KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT THE 16TH KARMAPA. WHY WOULD THE
16TH KARMAPA LEAVE TIBET WITHOUT ONE OF THE SINGULAR MOST IMPORTANT ITEMS IN HIS LIFE - THE BLACK CROWN? ONLY A LIAR OR IDIOT WOULD BELIEVE THIS.
"This is not to imply that I wish to live the sort of lonely and narcotics-shrouded existence she did," she wrote on her website. "What I love about her is her essence, her work and her commitment to it."
UNFORTUNATELY, SHE DID LEAD THE LIFE OF SOMEONE SHROUNDED IN DRUGS AND ALCOHOL.
Lana knew everybody. She was said to have dated Jack Nicholson and Warren Beatty.
WELL, NOT SURE WHAT TO THINK HERE. YOU'RE SO VAIN COMES TO MIND HOWEVER.
Answering fans' queries on her website, Lana was careful not to give too much of herself away - "I prefer to keep my love life private!" she wrote in one posting, then hinted teasingly at revelations to come.
HOW ABOUT HER BABY DOLL GIBSON TRYSTS? HER LOVE AFFAIR WITH RAUL LEVY WHO SAID SHE PLAYED KINKY SEX GAMES WITH GUNS AND TRIED TO THROW HERSELF OFF A BALCONY IN FRONT OF HIM? DIDN'T MICK BROWN GOOGLE THESE
THINGS? WHY DID BROWN THINK THE JUDGE GAGGED GIBSON AND EVERYONE WITH A SENSE OF DECENCY?
"As far as past relationships, there have been some great loves (some of them famous), but you'll have to read about them in my book. That won't be completed for a couple of years yet."
WOW! NOT RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAMOUS PEOPLE. FOR THE RECORD, I WAS NOT LEONARD COHEN'S LOVER. UNFORTUNATELY, I MUST NOW WRITE A BOOK. I WANT TO SET
THE RECORD STRAIGHT FOR MY CHILDREN. AND, IF POSSIBLE, I WANT TO HELP MY DEAR FRIEND PHIL SPECTOR. I ALSO NEVER HAD SEX WITH OLIVER STONE EVEN THOUGH LEONARD COHEN HAS ACCUSED ME OF DOING THAT - HIS FIRST LINE OF DEFENSE WHEN HE HEARD I WAS REPORTING HIS TAX FRAUD TO THE IRS.
By the mid-1990s, Lana's film and television career was on the wane and she would say that nowadays she considered herself a comedienne.
THIS VIDEO OF HER AS LITTLE RICHARD COULD ACTUALLY PROVE HOW SERIOUS HER DRUG PROBLEM WAS. ONLY THE LOST ANGELES DISTRICT LUNATIC WOULD ATTEMPT TO
GLAMORIZE THIS SITUATION.
She devised a stand-up routine, developing a range of comic characters, along the lines of Tracey Ullman, and started working small comedy clubs. Lana's shows were always full. But in the absence of acting roles, she needed something else.
WHERE WERE HER SOLD OUT SHOWS? WHAT ELSE DOES SHE NEED? RIGHT - VICODIN.
In December 2002 she applied for a job as hostess at the House of Blues on the Sunset Strip, across from the Chateau Marmont Hotel. The Foundation Room, or VIP lounge, of HOB is frequented by high rollers from the rock and film worlds. Membership costs $1,000 (£500) a year; champagne, $250 a bottle.
LOTS OF EXCESS IN HOLLYWOOD AND YET PHILLIP IS DEMONIZED FOR HELPING WAITRESSES BY LEAVING THEM EXTREMELY GENEROUS TIPS THAT ANYONE WOULD APPRECIATE.
It wasn't Lana's first choice for a job but she told friends she enjoyed the work, and was optimistic it would lead to better things. "I am going to meet people," she told one friend. "And it might get me another job."
WHAT WAS HER FIRST CHOICE FOR A JOB? MAYBE GOING HOME WITH PHIL SPECTOR WOULD HELP HER GET ANOTHER JOB. SHE CLEARLY THINKS LIKE THAT.
She worked from 6pm until 2am. It was 1.45am on February 3 when Phil Spector walked in. The details of what occurred would emerge during the next two years, from a combination of police evidence, the coroner's report and testimony to a grand jury.
THE DETAILS DIDN'T EMERGE. THE POLICE REPORTS ARE DERANGED AND SOUND LIKE THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE STORMING THE BASTILLE. AH, THE GRAND JURY. MICK
BROWN KNOWS - LEONARD COHEN TESTIFIED AGAINST PHIL SPECTOR. I GUESS BROWN WAS UNABLE TO GOOGLE ALL THE VERSIONS OF COHEN'S STORIES - INCLUDING THE ONE WHERE HE'S BITING INTO REVOLVERS IN HAMBURGERS IN A DARK PERIOD.
At a few minutes before 7pm on February 2, Adriano De Souza, Spector's stand-in driver, arrived at the producer's secluded home, the Alhambra castle.
HOW SECLUDED WAS HIS HOME? SOUNDS SO MYSTERIOUS.
Spector had a dinner date with a woman friend, Romy Davis. Two hours later, Spector dropped Davis off at her home and returned to the restaurant - he had made another assignation with a waitress, Kathy Sullivan.
DID PHILLIP MAKE AN ASSIGNATION? HOW ODD.
They ended up at the House of Blues, arriving at 1.30am. According to the police, Spector had been drinking at each stop along the way, consuming three, possibly four, daiquiri cocktails as well as two Navy Grog cocktails, each containing three shots of different kinds of rum.
WAS IT THREE OR FOUR? DID HE FINISH THEM? DO WE HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THIS? VIDEO FOOTAGE? OVER HOW MANY HOURS? HOW ABOUT CLARKSON'S TEQUILLA CONSUMPTION? THAT SOUNDED FAIRLY HEAVY.
Lana was waiting at her post at the entrance of the Foundation Room to greet new arrivals.
THE HOUSE OF BLUES SHOULD INVESTIGATE THE BACKGROUND OF ITS EMPLOYEES.
There was a moment's confusion; Lana did not know or recognise Spector and initially refused to let him into the members-only area.
SHE REALIZED WHO HE WAS FAIRLY QUICKLY.
Spector began to complain loudly, and another House of Blues employee, Euphrates Lalondriz, came to smooth things over, telling Lana who Spector was and that he was to be treated "like Dan Ackroyd - like gold". (Ackroyd has a share in the club.)
WHO WOULDN'T COMPLAIN? I TRIED TO LEAVE THE VIP ROOM. MY EX-HUSBAND AND I WERE THERE, AT THE INVITATION OF THE REGGAE PERFORMER WHO WANTED TO SPEAK
TO HIM ABOUT PRODUCING HIS ALBUM, WHEN I DECIDED TO LEAVE. I HEADED FOR THE EXIT SIGN AND SOME INSANE BOUNCER STARTED AN ARGUMENT WITH US. LINDSEY NEARLY HIT HIM. I ASKED FOR THE MANAGER, EXPLAINED WHO WE WERE, AND WAS OFFERED A LIFE TIME MEMBERSHIP. IT WAS AND REMAINS A PSYCHOTIC EPISODE.
Spector ordered a shot of Bacardi 151 rum "straight up". When Kathy Sullivan ordered only water, Spector grew angry, telling her to "get a f****** drink". Sullivan, who had been complaining of tiredness, refused and Spector told her: "That's it - you're going home."
ST I SEE PHILIP HAD IT WITH KATHY.
Spector called for Lana and told her to walk Sullivan to his car and tell De Souza to take her home, then return to collect Spector. He had purchased an $8.50 alcoholic drink and a $5 water and left a tip of $450. After settling the bill, Spector tried to order another drink but was told the bar was closed.
MOST PEOPLE CALL FOR THE STAFF WHEN THEY NEED SOMETHING. NICE OF PHILLIP TO SHIP KATHY HOME WITH HIS DRIVER. I WONDER WHAT THEY GOSSIPED ABOUT ON THE
WAY HOME.
At around 2am, Lalondriz overheard Lana on his headset asking if she could accept an invitation from Spector to have a drink.
SOUNDS OUTRAGEOUS.
Lalondriz heard the club manager tell her that she could not drink, but could sit with Spector. Lana was seen talking to Spector for a few minutes before the two walked out of the room together.
HOW CONVENIENT FOR THE HOUSE OF BLUES. I SEE THEIR LAWYERS THOUGHT THEY HAD LIABILITY.
Two minutes later, De Souza saw Spector emerge from the club, helped by Lana. As De Souza opened the door, Spector invited Lana to go home with him. She declined.
WHY WAS CLARKSON WALKING WITH HIM IF SHE WASN'T LEAVING WITH HIM?
Spector then offered her a lift to her car, which Lana accepted. During the drive, Spector continued to press his invitation, "More than once. Two, three times," according to De Souza. Finally, Lana relented.
THIS SOUNDS DERANGED. TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT DIFFERENT STORIES ABOUT PHILLIP. FOUR PERJURED STATEMENTS TO IMMIGRATION. AND VOILA - A GREEN CARD. INTERESTING HOW GOVERNMENT WORKS.
At the House of Blues employee parking lot, Lana got into her car. De Souza and Spector now followed Lana to a side street off La Cienega Boulevard where she parked her car.
As Lana got into Spector's Mercedes, she leant forward to De Souza and told him, "This will be quick. Only one drink." Spector turned to her. "You don't need to talk to the driver."
LANA CLARKSON NOW CONTROLS PHIL SPECTOR'S DRIVER. THE SITUATION IS NOW OUT OF CONTROL. I HAVE WITNESSED THIS SO MANY TIMES, IT IS NOT FUNNY. SEE SCOTT RABBS ARTICLE IN ESQUIRER AND THE SITUATION WITH BILL PAVELIC AND MICHELLE BLAINE WHO APPEARED TO BE ABOUT READY TO PROJECTILE VOMIT.
They arrived at Spector's home at about 3am. Spector and Lana got out and set off up the 88 steps towards the house. According to De Souza, Spector had some difficulty walking.
WHY?
Around 15 minutes later, Spector came out of the back door. According to De Souza "he looked mad" and disoriented. For the next 90 minutes or so De Souza waited in the car.
DID HE LOOK DISORIENTED? WHAT COULD THAT POSSIBLY MEAN? FELL ASLEEP IN THE CAR. HAD A SIESTA. ATE SOME SNACKS. WAS LISTENING TO THE RADIO. FOUNTAIN ON. AN ILLEGAL WORKER IN THE U.S. IS ABOUT TO BE FORCED TO ENCOUNTER THE POLICE OVER WHAT COULD BE - IN HIS MIND - A MURDER.
Then at 5am he heard what he would later describe as a soft popping sound. De Souza, who had served in the Brazilian military, thought he recognised it as a gunshot. He got out of the car, but could see nothing amiss and returned to the Mercedes.
DID SOMEONE FROM THE BRAZILIAN MILITARY THINK A GUNSHOT SOUNDED LIFE A SOFT POPPING SOUND? THE BRAZILIAN MILITARY MIGHT WANT TO VET THEIR SOLDIERS MORE CAREFULLY. THE DRIVER SEES NOTHING AND PROBABLY NEVER GOT OUT OF PHILLIP'S CAR. COMPLETELY IRRELVANT IN ANY EVENT.
It was then that Spector emerged from the back door, dressed in the clothes he had worn that evening. In his right hand was a revolver, which he was holding across his body. De Souza could see blood on the back of Spector's hand.
DID HE EMERGE FROM THE BACK DOOR? ISN'T PHILLIP LEFT HANDED? WHY WOULD HE BE HOLDING A GUN ACROSS HIS BODY? HOW DID HE SEE BLOOD ON THE BACK OF PHILLIP'S HAND - DOES HE HAVE XRAY VISION? OH RIGHT, MICK BROWN AND THE DA AND GOLD DIGGERS ARE WRITING THIS ... WHAT AM I THINKING?
It was at that point, according to De Souza, that Spector said: "I think I killed somebody." Looking past him into the hallway, De Souza could see Lana, slumped in a chair with blood on her face.
HE WASN'T GAZING PAST HIM OR LOOKING LOVINGLY IN HIS EYES? I SAW CLARKSON SLUMPED. IT LOOKED LIKE SHE FELL BACK INTO THE CHAIR AND PHILLIP WOULD HAVE TO BE STRATTLING HER TO HAVE SHOT HER IN THE MOUTH WHICH SOUNDS DERANGED.
He asked: "What happened, sir?" Spector shrugged and said, "I don't know." He then turned back towards the house.
SIR. I THOUGHT PHILLIP JUST SAID HE KILLED HER SO WHY WOULDN'T HE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED NOW?
De Souza tried to call 911 on his mobile phone, but was so shaken he was unable to make the call. He climbed back into the car and set off back down the drive.
IS THERE EVIDENCE THAT HE TRIED TO CALL 911 PRIOR TO CALLING BLAINE? WHY DID HE TAKE PHILLIP'S CAR? WAS HE GOING TO STEAL IT?
Part of the way down, he stopped and telephoned Spector's assistant, Michelle Blaine, leaving a message on her voice mail: "You have to come here. I think Mr Spector killed somebody." He then continued down the driveway to the entrance and dialled 911.
THE PERFECT STORM BEGINS. BLAINE HAS STOLEN NEARLY $1 MILLION FROM PHILLIP.
The first police car arrived at the gate of Spector's house shortly after 5am.
WHERE'S THE AMBULANCE?
According to Officer Michael Page, Spector appeared "mildly agitated". Spector was told to put his hands up, and did so before putting them back into his pockets. He turned to go into the house saying: "You got to come see this."
REALLY. MILDLY AGITATED. HE TOLD HIS COUSIN ANTHONY THAT PHILLIP LOOKED LIKE HE WAS GOING FOR A GUN. PHILLIP INVITES THEM INTO HIS HOUSE AND WHAT
UNFOLDS IS PSYCHOTIC.
He was again warned to take his hands out of his pockets and, when he refused, Page fired a Taser dart at him. It didn't work. Spector backed further into the house, pursued by another officer. Another dart was fired, again with no effect, and Spector was restrained and handcuffed.
THE TASER DART WORKED. PAGE IS A PATHETIC LIAR AND SO ARE HIS COWORKERS. TWO TASERS HAD NO EFFECT. TO SAY PHIL SPECTOR WAS RESTRAINED IS AN OUTRAGE.
Then Page looked up and saw the body of Lana slumped in a chair.
AMAZING. PERHAPS PAGE THOUGHT HE WAS AT A FOOTBALL GAME INITIALLY. WHY DIDN'T PAGE BRING A MEDIC IN WITH HIM?
"She had what appeared to be a single entry gunshot wound to the mouth," the police report would state. Broken teeth - her teeth - were scattered about the foyer and an adjacent stairway. Lying on the floor under her left leg was a Colt.38-calibre six-shot revolver. A check of the weapon serial number was negative. There was blood splattered on the weapon.
MY GOD. WHAT PHIL SPECTOR WITNESSED IS OUTRAGEOUS. THE WEAPON, ACCORDING TO BRUCE CUTLER, WAS NOT PHIL SPECTOR'S. WHEN PEOPLE SHOOT THEMSELVES THERE IS USUALLY BLOOD SPATTER ON THE WEAP0N.
One of the attending officers, Beatrice Rodriguez, said she heard Spector say: "What's wrong with you guys? What are you doing? I didn't mean to shoot her. It was an accident. I have an explanation."
SHE'S A LIAR AND HER BUDDIES DIDN'T HEAR THIS EXCHANGE.
That statement was not captured on tape. But immediately afterwards Officer Page activated his cassette recorder, and captured the subsequent exchanges between Spector and police.
WHY DID PAGE DECIDE TO ACTIVATE THE CASSETTE RECORDER NOW RATHER THAN WHEN THEY FIRST APPROACHED PHILLIP? WHY DID PAGE HAVE SOMEONE THROW SOMETHING OVER
THE VIDEO CAMERA? PAGE THINKS LIKE THIS: WE COULD HAVE LEGAL LIABILITY. THIS IS A CELEBRITY. LET'S COVER UP ANY EVIDENCE OF WRONG DOING IN CASE WE SCREW UP.
Spector continued: "If you're gonna arrest me, just tell me what happened... Jesus. You know you're acting stupid. Get the f*** off of me! This is stupid. I'm sorry there's a dead woman here. But I'm sorry but this happened. I can explain it but if you'd just give me a chance... You don't have to handcuff me. I can tell you what happened. What's wrong with you people? Jack Maple worked for me. Jesus Christ, the chief of police worked for me...
REALLY. IF YOU'RE GOING TO ARREST SOMEONE TELL THEM WHAT HAPPENED - SINCE YOU WEREN'T THERE. WHO WOULDN'T BE SORRY THERE WAS A DEAD WOMAN IN THEIR HOUSE
AND WHO WOULDN'T RUSH TO THEIR AID? LAPD DID WORK FOR PHIL SPECTOR - SEE JAY ROMAINE/LAPD ROBBERY HOMICIDE. I THINK HE WAS PROBABLY ARMED. MAYBE HE WAS ONE OF THE ARMED MEN LEONARD COHEN ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT. ARMED TO THE TEETH EVIDENTLY.
'I'm sorry this happened. I don't know how it happened, but it happened and I'm sorry this happened. But, excuse me... The gun went off accidentally. She works at the House of Blues. It was a mistake. I don't understand what the f***, you people, is wrong with you? Jack Maple worked for me. He worked for the chief of police. Oh, God. I'm just gonna go to sleep. Would you like me to go to sleep"
POOR PHILLIP.
The coroner's report would later note that the weapon found under Lana's leg was "apparently taken" from a holster, which the police found, also stained with blood, in a drawer in the hall.
WHY WAS IT APPARENTLY TAKEN FROM A HOLSTER? SO THE GUN WAS PLACED BACK IN THE HOLSTER AND THAT'S WHY THERE WAS BLOOD ON IT? SOUNDS INSANE.
Although Lana's blood remained in the engraving and in other recessed areas of the weapon, the gun had been wiped after the shooting. In a powder room off the hall, police found a cloth soaked in both water and Lana's blood lying on the floor.
PHILLIP RUSHED TO HER AID.
In an upstairs dressing room, thrown on the floor, police found the white jacket that Spector had been wearing that evening; the left sleeve and front of the jacket were covered in a mist-like spray of Lana's blood. A search of the house uncovered 13 other guns and ammunition of the same type as that in the Colt.38.
HAVE YOU EVER BEEN AROUND BLOOD THAT'S ALL OVER? IT SMELLS TERRIBLY. IT IS THICK AND STICKY. I KNOW. LORCA COHEN'S DOG IMPALED HIMSELF ATTEMPTING TO GET OUT OF HER APARTMENT AND THE ENTIRE FLAT WAS COVERED IN BLOOD. I HAD TO CHANGE MY CLOTHES AND WASH UP AFTER CLEANING UP.
Two cocktail glasses, one containing trace amounts of alcohol, were found. Toxicology showed Lana's blood contained "therapeutic levels" of Vicodin, an opiate-based painkiller.
WHAT IS A THERAPEUTIC LEVEL OF VICODIN? IT'S A POWERFUL OPIATE-BASED PAINKILLER THAT SHOULD NOT BE MIXED WITH ALCOHOL AND GUNS.
Paramedics waited for almost an hour before being allowed in. At 6.24am, five hours after her first meeting with Phil Spector, Lana Clarkson was pronounced dead.
COPS ARRIVED AT 5 AM. THEREFORE, IT TOOK ONE AND A HALF HOURS FOR THE POLICE TO BRING IN MEDICS. PHIL SPECTOR FOUND THIS UNCONSCIONABLE - AS DO I.
Tearing Down the Wall of Sound by Mick Brown (Bloomsbury) can be ordered for £14.99 plus £1.25 p&p from Telegraph Books (0870 428 4112)
BROWN WILL NOW PROFIT OFF OF PHIL SPECTOR'S SUFFERING AND ALIGN HIMSELF WITH BLAINE, SPROCKET, THE DARWIN EXCEPTION, AND OTHER SHADY CHARACTERS.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/3631681/I-think-I-killed-somebody.html
Showing posts with label Phil Spector Appeal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Phil Spector Appeal. Show all posts
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Leonard Cohen Had Sony Pay Pico Iyer & Leon Wieseltier $2,500 Each For These Reviews
LETTERS FOR LEONARD
by
LEON WIESELTIER & PICO IYER
DEAR HEATHER:
"It seemeth to me there is as it were a plague in the house". Those are the mysterious words, from the Book of Leviticus, that the owner of a house addresses to a priest when he notices a strange lesion on his dwelling, and seeks relief from the impurity that is denoted by this wound to his walls. What is so striking about this voice, what struck the commentators about it, is its tentativeness, its imprecision, its uncertainty. It is rare in Scripture that somebody does not know for sure. But this man does not report a plague in his house, he reports his impression of a 
plague in his house. Why? Perhaps his fear has rattled his confidence in his mind. But another explanation (always another explanation!) was given. The point of this locution, so unfamiliar in the biblical universe but so familiar in the human universe, is, in the words of an ancient rabbi, to "teach your tongue to say: ‘I do not know’".
Here endeth the midrash for Dear Heather. But it is precisely from such a tongue that this reflective and lovely and companionable record has fallen. For poets, for artists, for thinkers, there is no more perilous illusion than the illusion of the last word. There is no such thing as the last word, because in another moment the light will change, the page will turn, the caress will end, the ice will melt, the shadow will pass, the glass will break, the news will arrive – the world will no longer look as it did, the world will no longer be what it was, when you wrote or spoke or sang the words that were designed to capture it, and to fix it, and to settle the matter of its meaning once and for all. The ideal of the last word represents only a desire to be released from the variety and the mutability of life, to bring experience and expression to an end. Behind the grandiosity of the last word, the big statement, the final image, the ultimate conclusion – behind all these conceits and coercions lies a sorry exhaustion and a specious authority.
Dear Heather is a retort to such exhaustion and a rejection of such authority. Its achievement is owed to the reduction of its scale. 
Cohen has always been fascinated by his own smallness: he does not rebel against it so much as he rebels within it. His art has been a long and invigorating endeavor to coax significance out of insignificance. He never introduces anything large or anything lasting except wryly, as if to say: here is what he who does not know knows. And Dear Heather is a perfect document of this brilliant humility. Here the form has caught up with the philosophy. The record is a notebook, a scrapbook, a sketchbook, a miscellany of ideas and moods and observations and diversions -- the definitive declaration of Cohen’s glad loss of interest in the definitive. The temper here is provisional, digressive, incomplete, quiet, experimental, generous, artisanal. Dear Heather is located in the middle of the work and in the middle of the world. Cohen sings, but not always; sometimes he lets others sing (especially Anjani Thomas, in whose preternaturally gorgeous voice Cohen has found the most angelic of all his "angels"), and sometimes he speaks, his own words or the words of others. He wishes to give what he loves a hearing. Even in sadness, he comes to praise.
The record revels in its own lack of monumentality. No emotions are exempted from its insistence upon the reality, and the beauty, of the ordinary. Consider "On That Day", Cohen’s contribution to the mourning for September 11, 2001. On the occasion of "the day they wounded New York", he has written a ditty. It is all of two minutes long, and it includes the unplangent twanging of a Jew’s harp. But there is no blasphemy in this simplicity. Not at all. The song is deeply affecting because of its refusal of the temptation of magnitude, and also because of its argument that one may respond to evil with madness or with service. Compare this unlikely commemoration to the bombastic arena-rock threnodies that were provoked by the catastrophe in New York and you will have a lesson in grief’s integrity. Or consider "Dear Heather", the wickedly amusing title track. Here it is not sorrow that is translated into the idiom of the actual, it is desire. A woman walks by a man and undoes him so completely that he must teach himself again to spell. Cohen is tickled by the banality of his own lust. Where anguish once was there now is silliness. The longing persists, but the slavery is over. And the evidence of inner freedom is everywhere in Dear Heather. It is a window upon the heart of an uncommonly interesting and uncommonly mortal man, a man with the stomach for transience. Leon Wieseltier
DEAR HEATHER:
"It’s a leave-taking, with light," I found myself saying, to my own surprise, the first time I listened to Dear Heather. I was sitting in a small cottage in central Los Angeles, looking out on a sunlit garden, flowers, a constant trickle of water from a fountain where birds splashed (the freeway nearby seeming a million miles away), and what I was hearing might have been a transcription of 
the scene around me. In the past, especially on his last album, Ten New Songs, Leonard Cohen often seemed to push his songs towards darkness and silence, the place where everything gives out. Indeed, the power of that record seemed to me to lie partly in its singleness, its unity of tone, the songs flowing one into the other with a grave, contained intensity. This was the beauty of a small cabin beside a Zen meditation-hall high up in the mountains.
The new record, for me, is the beauty of returning to the world again, celebrating its beauties, even though they will pass. In one of his early songs about the monastic pull, Cohen wrote of how "night comes in," as he goes into the dark to court Our Lady of Solitude; here I feel as if night is receding, as light comes in. The first surprise of the record is how various and almost floral are its musical arrangements, the singer hopping from style to style like a bee buzzing amidst the flowers. The first time I heard the record I imagined a series of objects lined up on a table, all precisely rounded, like brightly colored balls, entire in themselves and lucid, but not pointing to anything beyond themselves. 
Offerings for a Sunday morning, you could say, at home in the sun.
Cohen has suffered more than almost any songwriter or poet alive from assumptions about his life, or at least that shadow-life that is his legend; people seize on the songs with women in them, or using his central (often metaphorical) word "naked," and miss the point often. The second song here teases us with the Cohen we expect--women, naked, crying "Look at me, Leonard." The fact he uses his own name, again and again, is almost a way of stressing that he’s talking about the figure who moves through the world, in rumors, in gossip columns, in listener projections. With that second song, Leonard departs.
The others startle with their sense of completeness -- or, put another way, with their lack of obvious gravitas, their freedom from obvious depth. They’re transparent: notebook entries, or a series of recipes hung up on a refrigerator door. When you expect Cohen to go deeper into a song, to give us a new verse, a different turn, as he’s always done before, he steps back, gives us the same verse again. When you expect him to surprise us, as he’s always done, with an 
unexpected rhyme, he surprises us by giving us just the word we expect. And often the words more or less dissolve, as the singer experiments with chant, or incantation, the place where music becomes something more than music, closer to prayer or ritual recitation. "And your legs white from the winter."
And all the while, his voice, which had already begun to recede from view in Ten New Songs, where Sharon Robinson, his conspirator and co-producer, led on many tracks, fades further and further away from us, until Robinson and Anjani Thomas take over, and replace his dark sonorities with their more light-filled decorations. A ceremony of farewell, in a way.
The first time I listened to this record, I couldn’t help but wonder what listeners would make of it. Many of his fans look for long, gnarled poems from Leonard Cohen, for parables and theological mutterings; they’re not ready for songs as straightforward, and full of fresh air, as a 16th century lyric. He’s giving us here, essentially, jottings, moments, the things he might collect for a letter to a friend. It’s no coincidence, I’m sure--things are precise on Leonard Cohen albums--that, in the C.D. brochure, there are sketches all over the place, simple, whimsical, unfancy, and on many pages the drawings drown out the words.
Anyone who writes knows that transparency is at least as hard to catch as mystery. Mystery means taking on all that is beyond the self (or inside the self); transparency means recording all that is outside the self, and independent of it. Usually, when we describe something, we cloud it over with our thoughts, our projections, our hopes for it, our confusions. Just to give the thing as it is is often the hardest task of all, which is why we admire a Cezanne still life, or a small red wheelbarrow in a William Carlos Williams poem.
It’s also the easiest thing to underestimate, or look past. I can imagine a music critic rejoicing in the way this record -- quite literally, a record of a life, a day -- opens up the palette to admit new colors; but the exegete will be confounded by the fact that the words just stand there, giving up nothing but themselves. There’s no spin on them, no gloss. Cohen has traditionally been the voice of striving, of conflict and seeking; here he becomes something harder for us to accept, a voice of contentment. It’s as if he’s withdrawn his self from things in order to say, "This is what they are. They have no need of me"
When I was trying to grasp this record, elusive precisely because it sits in full view, illuminated, less hidden or in shadow than is usual with Leonard Cohen, I thought of the poems of the Japanese among whom I live. A plover. A temple-bell. A marigold. Observation of the world for them becomes observation of a ritual, even of a religion. Indeed, it is from their straight-on renditions of the world that Pound got his imagism, from which William Carlos Williams took his wheelbarrow. The Zen discipline tells us to look at what’s in front of us, and what’s beneath our feet. No need to search for enlightenment or beauty or analytic wisdom, no need to seek out meaning or depth. It’s all right there, in front of our eyes.
Pico Iyer
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
The U.S. Supreme Court Grapples With The Judicial & Prosecutorial Misconduct In Phil Spector's Set Up - No One Else Does!
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/phil-spector-requests-appeal-from-u-s-supreme-court-20111216
Thursday, June 30, 2011
The Usual Suspects - Cyber Terrorists - Descend On The Phil Spector Set Up
Gianelli, who is obsessed with Phil Spector and who has targeted me and others relentlessly (as well as having lied to the FBI and others - quite blatantly), appears to set up reasonable doubt theories tied to serious legal problems for the prosecution. These issues can then be publicly refuted. ICE apparently decided to reward the lying driver with a green card which obviously denied Phil Spector a fair trial.
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2009/03/doron_weinberg_returns_--_agai.php
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2009/03/doron_weinberg_returns_--_agai.php
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Obsessed Phil Spector Blogger - Jihad Gianelli's "Disclaimer" May Serve No Purpose
I believe Jihad Gianelli is concealing the true purpose of his Blog. His last "article" posted on or around May 2, 2011 is a list of 9/11 victims. Prior to that he has a "Happy Easter" notice with no comments; an "article" about a woman who injured herself clapping with no comments; and - of course - an article on Phil Spector with 180 comments:
http://blogonaut-blogonaut.blogspot.com/2011/04/spector-oral-arguments-today-justice.html
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/06/nj_supreme_court_rules_blogger_1.html
SPECTOR ORAL ARGUMENTS TODAY: JUSTICE ALDRICH APPEARS HOSTILE TO SPECTOR APPEAL, KLINE SYMPATHETIC, KITCHING AN ENIGMA
180 comments:
Excerpted comments:-
Honestly I don't think this appellate court wanted to take away from the DA's office their first celebrity murder conviction.
I do believe that the California Supreme court will overturn it. - May 30, 2011 7:01 PM
- Aloha said...
-
What overwhelming evidence of guilt? Where? There isn't any. That was the response the AG representative gave, I believe it was to Justice Klein, in response to a question about the 5 women who testified.
- May 30, 2011 10:05 PM
- Anonymous said...
-
According to the Linda Deutche report who has been pretty fair to Spector, Riordan will ask the Supreme Court to review on June 13. Unfortunately the sharks are circling as the civil case is coming to head in January 2012 and I would expect a 10 million plus judgement. Even if the Supreme Court were to review the case it will take years to wind its way through. The thing about the 2nd districts ruling that was so telling was how swift the opinion was rendered and how many times Riordan opposed giving the AG more time to answer. Not very smart. Hopefully they learn and be very humbled if the Supreme court agrees to hear the case.
http://blogonaut-blogonaut.blogspot.com/2011/04/spector-oral-arguments-today-justice.html
N.J. Supreme Court says blogger not protected from revealing her sources
Published: Wednesday, June 08, 2011, 9:00 AM Updated: Wednesday, June 08, 2011, 6:12 PM
TRENTON —New Jersey’s legal protections allowing journalists to keep their sources secret do not apply to those who post to online message boards, the state Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
The court, clarifying an area of law that has not kept up with advances on the internet, said bloggers must have some connection to "news media" to invoke New Jersey’s shield law protecting journalists from revealing their confidential sources.
"To ensure that the privilege does not apply to every self-appointed newsperson, the legislature requires that other means of disseminating news be ‘similar’ to traditional news sources to qualify for the law’s coverage," Chief Justice Stuart Rabner wrote for the 5-0 court. "We do not find that online message boards are similar to the types of news entities listed in the statute ..."
The long-awaited decision, which included arguments from media groups and the state ACLU, overturned part of an appellate court ruling that would have established stricter criteria for journalists to qualify for the protection.
"This is just a beginning to this conversation," said Bruce Rosen, a Florham Park attorney representing the New Jersey Press Association. "This conversation is going to go on for years, but it’s a good place to start."
Courts have already ruled people can be sued for comments they post on message boards, but this case addressed what protections "nontraditional" media have in an era when newspapers, magazines, television and radio are no longer the only sources of news.
The ruling was made in the case of a blogger from Washington State who posted alleged defamatory statements about a Marlboro-based software company.
In comments she posted to a message board about an online security breach, Shellee Hale claimed Too Much Media LLC’s owners had threatened her sources and failed to report the breach because they profited from the stolen email addresses. TMM, which helps online adult entertainment companies track sales, sued for defamation and Hale sought protection of shield law.
A former Microsoft employee and a private investigator, Hale argued she was preparing an article for her website, Pornafia.com, about the infiltration of pornography on the internet when she posted her comments about TMM in 2008.
TMM argued Hale is not a journalist and fabricated the purpose of her website to seek the protection.
A Superior Court judge in Monmouth County ruled in 2009 that the protection did not apply to Hale. An appellate panel later that year upheld that decision but also set very specific criteria for journalists to qualify for the protection.
But the Supreme Court — to the delight of a group of media outlets invited into the arguments — shot down the appeals court’s criteria. It said the test is whether there is a connection to news media, if the purpose of the report is to gather or disseminate news and if the information was obtained during professional newsgathering activities.
In her case, Hale insisted Pornafia was a legitimate medium. But the court noted she never launched the news magazine portion of the website. The court also noted her alleged defamatory statements appeared exclusively on the message board, which the court said was one step removed from the electronic equivalent of a letter to the editor in a newspaper.
TMM attorney Joel Kreizman of Ocean Township welcomed the decision because he said the lawsuit can finally proceed.
"We’ve been stuck on this issue for over two years. This case normally would have gone to trial by now. We’re almost basically starting from scratch," he said.
Hale’s attorney, Jeffrey Pollock of Princeton, said he will ask the Supreme Court to reconsider its ruling that the decision applies retroactively to his client.
He said the decision narrows the scope of people who qualify for the protection to keep sources confidential, a sentiment echoed by the Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based policy research group.
"Putting aside the wisdom of shield laws, they should not exist to protect only certain classes of Americans a court defines as ‘journalists.’ Freedom of the press is not truly free if the definition of ‘press’ is left up to the whim of a judge," said Jim Lakely, co-director of the institute’s Center on the Digital Economy.http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/06/nj_supreme_court_rules_blogger_1.html
Leonard Cohen's Predicate Acts Of Theft
Kelley’s Conversation w/ Steven Machat
February 13, 2010
Steven confirmed that he visited with Cohen in 2007 regarding the film “Bird On A Wire.” When he went to see Cohen he wanted to discuss Buddhism. Steven was living with Semina who was Muslim. Cohen refused to discuss Buddhism and noted that he was now Jewish.
“He introduced me to his groundskeeper” – Robert Kory. “He had Robert Kory in the background taping me.” “Leonard Cohen was so scared.” – he said “I found your film, Bird On A Wire.” He said “I have had it since 1990.” The reason Cohen gave for keeping this film rather than returning it to Steven Machat was “to keep it away from Avril.” [Avril Giacobbi] At this point Kory apparently begins coughing. The film is not given to Steven at this point in time.
| hide details 2:59 PM (37 minutes ago) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kelly, the one problem is kory. I did not know him in 07 and only when I met in 09 did I put 2 n 2 together and figure he was the handyman.
Just my thoughts.
Will go over the rest again later. Be safe.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
|
| ||||||||||||||||
not sure if it was kory but i believe it was he.same size as the man i meet two years later telling me he was kory here in london. not sure about the recording but something was going on in that other room. it was funny cohen with a roadie. good hearing your voice again. please take care of your self. let go of anger and win. it is a game and he does not play to win bwcause when you win you then share the spoils of victory with the players who played your game. if you make them the losers you will never have peace.
- Show quoted text -
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:24 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Steven,
Great speaking with you. You and I agree - Leonard Cohen is a fraud
and a thief. It's incredible that when you visited Cohen re. Bird On
A Wire he introduced Robert Kory as his grounds keeper. Wasn't it
illegal of Kory to record your conversation with Cohen? Kory is
indeed scum. The situation with the theft of you and your father's
publishing (and "When I Need You" which I know for a fact you and your
father negotiated) is unconscionable but this is what Cohen does. It
is indeed ugly.
Thanks for reminding me that Spector Records owned "Death Of A Ladies
Man." It's incredible that Leonard Cohen stole them from Phillip and
sold them to Sony. I do recall that Sony International released the
tapes internationally. I would assume Phillip knows that the royalty
split with Cohen was 50/50 - to be paid directly to Phillip because it
was not to go against Cohen's recoupment.
Cohen and Kory thought you were in a conspiracy with you? The slander
is outrageous, isn't it Steven? You're dead right - he hates women
and he is a misogynist. I know this. Ann Diamond knows this. Others
know it.
Why would Cohen have to borrow money? He received a $1 million
advance in the fall of 2004 and the only amount I received was my
commission. Cohen refuses to give me a 1099 and I have no idea what
they are calling it. When I amend my 2001-2010 tax returns (once
Cohen gives me the forensic accounting; rescinds his fraud lawsuit -
we agree ... he sued me to force me into a deal; rescinds the illegal
K1s, etc.) I'll address this.
I absolutely intend to sue Robert Kory. You should sue him as well.
Cohen stopped a deal on October 21, 2004. I, and others, worked on
that for a very long time. I intend to sue him for my commissions;
publishing; and I intend to sue him for theft. It is absolutely
theft. I think the default should be thrown out of court -
particularly as two companies were snuck into the default judgment
that weren't parties to the lawsuit.
I think your father would be proud that you and I have decided to be
honest about Phil Spector. Robaitaille may have been his lover. She
also, I believe, sold her story. We both know she worked for Phillip
when I worked for you and your father. I never once heard any stories
from her about Phillip and guns. Did you Steven?
Talk to you later. Get some sleep.
All the best,
Kelley
--
Best regards,
Steven
Steven Machat
The Machat Company
2 Old Brompton Road, Suite 541
London
SW7 3DQ
The conversation skips ahead to a conversation Steven had with Robert Kory. Steven told Kory “I will get into a war to get this [Bird On A Wire film] back.” Steven called Kory. He said “I want that film and I want it now.” Kory told Steven “You can’t threaten Leonard.” Steven asked Kory “Who the fuck are you?”
At some point, Robert Kory met with Steven. Steven’s lady, Misha, was present. Kory told Steven “We can stop this book.” Kory is referring to Steven’s book “Gods, Gangsters and Honour.” Steven informed Kory “You can’t stop truth.” They eventually sent Steven 294 reels of the Bird On A Wire film. It was missing the edited version and possibly negatives. “I had to find Tony Palmer. Kory and Cohen figured he can’t do this [make the film].” “They had the audio inside the tapes.”
Steven talking about Cohen: “They fuck over women.” He may also be referring to Kory. I note that Cohen and his son are misogynists. We briefly discuss what Cohen/Lindsey have done to Ray: “That is horrible” notes Steven.
Steven cannot understand how Cohen gets away with what he gets away with. I mention that Greg McBowman noted that Cohen is “Teflon.” Steven cannot believe that just about every single word in Cohen’s lawsuit is a lie. It is inconceivable to him that anyone would file such fraudulent and perjured documents.
“Kory is such scum.” Steven mentions that this is interesting to note: “They told Misha (Palestinian) … he volunteered that he and Leonard Cohen opened a charity in Israel. Steven said he didn’t believe the deposited anything into the charity.
We talk about Cohen meeting with Avril Giacobbi at Chemical Bank. I recalled that Cohen told me he was giving Avril a check for Marty/Machat & Machat for $35,000 he owed them in expenses. Steven said they met Stuart Kahn at Chemical Bank downstairs from our offices. Steven and I both recall that Avril Giacobbi went down to Chemical Bank with Marty’s signature on a document. Steven informs me that this check was never deposited into Marty/Machat & Machat’s account. He mentions Flemming Schmidt. Steven knows that Flemming was Cohen’s promoter. I bring up the monies paid to Flemming and Dominique Isserman from Cohen’s off-shore account: $100,000 to each. We discuss the fact that one account was with Loyens & Volkmaars.
Somehow the bearer bonds are brought up. Steven asks “Why would Dad have bearer bonds. Anyone can steal them?” I don’t really know. I mention that I saw the bearer bonds at Cohen’s once and they/it was issued to R&M Productions. Steven confirms that R&M Productions refers to Roz & Marty and says “That s where we put our publishing” referring to his father and himself. I tell Steven that Cohen informed me that he was advised to open these types of off-shore accounts by Rolf Budde. I believe there may be other off-shore accounts and that Cohen probably stole back Marty/Steven’s publishing in R&M Productions. Steven tells me he could never stand Herschel Weinberg and says Cohen was referred to him by Esther Cohen. I tell Steven that both Esther and Victor Cohen were friends with Herschel Weinberg who has died.
Steven is extremely upset about “When I Need You.” He told Cohen and Kory: “I want my song back” and mentions that Celine Dion did a cover of that song.
I ask if Cohen/Kory contacted Steven again. Steven says “They tried to stop the movie. They let us show it at the fan gathering.” Steven explains that he put together some type of fan gathering that 2,500 people attended. His son, Baron, attended. Baron had never really met his grandfather or was too young to remember so this event was especially important for Steven. “At this festival … I was watching my son meet this …” [Marty] Steven notes that the film Bird On A Wire contains the scene with Cohen licking acid off the paper. Sony then writes Steven that he doesn’t have the rights. Steven threatened to sue and advises Sony that “Leonard Cohen gave us permission to put it out” and mentions something about the fan club showing. Steven gave Sony an email from Robert Kory that Leonard Cohen liked the film, saw it, and gave permission. Sony advises Steven “You don’t have the mechanical licenses.” Steven advises Sony that the “movie was finished in 1972. No one signed a license with you and Sony other than my father. Marty gave blanket licenses forever on the mechanicals – gratis.” Steven advised Kory that he can sell the tapes which include valuable footage of Cohen as a boy. At the festival, Steven spoke to Cohen’s fans about his father. Apparently the fans were upset with Steven. Steven felt his father’s presence during the entire situation.
Somehow we end up discussing Robert Shapiro. Steven had mentioned that Phillip was not properly represented originally:
“My daughter shot heroin with Brent Shapiro.” I called Robert Shapiro and said “I’m Steven Machat. We know each other. We were at a wedding [a friend of Steven’s wife got married.] Shapiro remembers Steven from the wedding. Steven tells Shapiro: “I’m sitting here with Brent. We are here with my daughter. They were shooting heroin.” Shapiro then says “I don’t know you. You could be anyone” and tells Steven “This conversation is ended.” Steven tells Shapiro “Your son is crying out to meet with you.” Steven tells Shapiro that Brent would like to talk to his father. Shapiro tells Steven “Fuck you” and hangs up.
We discuss Devra Robaitaille and the DA’s interest in her. Steven says “She was Phil Spector’s assistant when I first started with Dad.” I ask why Steven thinks she turned on Phillip and he notes that they may have been lovers and seems to believe she was disgruntled.
We discuss Cohen and his good rock ‘n roll comments about Phillip. Steven tells me that Cohen did not have attorney/client privilege with my lawyer, Steve Cron, the day he met with LAPD detectives about Phillip. Steven said Cohen once told him that “Phil Spector is insane” and says something about a “gun.” Steven asked Cohen “Were their bullets in the gun?” He says something about a “toy gun” that I’m not clear about. Cohen tells Steven “You’re just like your father.” I ask if he recalls that his father disarmed Cohen once. He does. Steven tells me that Cohen obstructed justice in a murder trial.
Steven mentions something about Phil Spector and stolen tapes. He mentions Warner Bros Records and Death Of A Ladies Man. Sony said they got the tapes from Leonard Cohen. I suppose Steven spoke to Sony about this situation. Steven tells me that the tapes belong to Spector Records. Leonard Cohen had been dropped from Columbia at the time. He tells me that Cohen sold Phillip’s masters to Sony. The record came out on Sony overseas. The royalties were supposed to be paid to Phillip. The royalty split between Cohen and Phillip was 50/50. Phil Spector was to get all the royalties paid to him so Cohen’s share would not go against his deficit with Sony. I advise Steven that Phillip had me call Sony, after his father’s death, to advise them that they were paying his royalties through to Cohen.
Steven tells me that Cohen is worried about how far Steven will go. I ask what Cohen had to say about me. He tells me “They thought I was in a conspiracy with you.” I ask why. Steven says “Because they are guilty.” He is talking about Cohen and Kory. Cohen started to talk about me. Cohen asks Steven “Do you know how good she was at it?” He mentions something about a $490,000 Amex bill. I don’t know that this is accurate – at all – and don’t believe it is. Steven tells Cohen that someone could spend that in one month. Steven and I discuss the fact that I had to put my card printing on my Amex card and other expenses. We were waiting for the Sony deal to close and Cohen’s terms were outrageous – a stock deal; net $4 million for him; $1 million for me (per Cohen). Steven asks Cohen why he didn’t file a criminal charge against me and asks if Cohen thinks the IRS won’t charge him. Steven then says “The workmen said it’s time to go to temple” and mentioned that Cohen is “hedging his bets.” Steven said Cohen “was so nervous.” Cohen told Steven that I took everything and he had to borrow money. We discuss the $1 million Cohen received in August/September 2004; the deal that Sony/ATV put an offer in for on October 21, 2010. Etc. Steven says “He owes you the commission on that.” Steven notes that “Robert Kory” thinks like this – “this” being what has unfolded. I note that Leonard Cohen thinks like this also. We discuss Ken Cleveland’s views on Robert Kory. We discuss my Indemnity Agreement and how difficult it must have been for Cohen to explain to Anjani Thomas my so-called 99.5% share of TH. I ask Steven why he thinks Scott Edelman would have willfully overlooked the corporate books and records. Steven says because Cohen “asked him to overlook them.” He thinks it’s a very very serious matter. He also thinks the situation with Boies Schiller attempting to find me lawyers is a very serious situation. Steven thinks it’s good that I documented my meetings with Kory for Boies Schiller because it serves as a record of what occurred.
Steven advises me that I need to sue Cohen. He is concerned about statutes. I mention that fraud tolls the statutes. He advises me to sue Kory also. I tell Steven that he should sue Cohen and Kory also. He tells me that they “don’t know the law.” I believe he is talking about Cohen and Kory. He tells me he will be a witness for me. The fact that I have to amend my 2001-2010 tax returns and can’t is a serious legal issue from Steven’s perspective. We discuss the fact that two entities were snuck into the default judgment. Steven says that would be “thrown out of court,” notes that it’s illegal and notes that it’s THEFT. We discuss theft, wrongful conversion, suing for an accounting, etc. He advises me to go to UC Berkeley Lawsuit. Says this would make a great thesis and have them help me with my lawsuit. He also advises me to write a book about “The Lawsuit.” I tell Steven I want to wait for Phil Spector and his legal team. Steven’s writing a book on the banking industry and other matters.
Steven goes back to discussing Bird On A Wire. “Leonard Cohen acted like Mr. Big Shot. You see him in Israel telling the crowd he couldn’t sing. He told my dad he was going to incite a riot at that concert. He was going to tell them off.”
I ask about his share of Stranger Music. Steven says “I told them I don’t want my share of Stranger Music. I don’t want anything to do with you.” He is very upset about everything Cohen has done to his father. He is upset about “When I Need You.” He told Cohen/Kory “That was my song. Give it back.” He explains that “Dad had me have my law school write the complaint” for the copyright infringement relating to Albert Hammond’s “When I Need You” and Cohen’s song “Famous Blue Raincoat.” I believe 17 notes were identical. I ask Steven if he thinks Cohen stole the melody from Albert Hammond. Steven said Cohen released the song first. Phil Spector probably knows the facts about this melody.
From Wikipedia:
The melody of the "hook" line, or chorus of "When I Need You" is identical to the part of the Leonard Cohen song "Famous Blue Raincoat," where the lyrics are as follows: "Jane came by with a lock of your hair, she said that you gave it to her that night that you planned to go clear." The melody of these lyrics matches the lyrics of "When I Need You" as follows: "(When I) need you, I just close my eyes and I'm with you, and all that I so want to give you, is only a heart beat away."
In a 2006 interview with the Globe & Mail Cohen said:
I once had that nicking happen with Leo Sayer. Do you remember that song 'When I Need You'?" Cohen sings the chorus of Sayer's number one hit from 1977, then segues into 'And Jane came by with a lock of your hair,' a lyric from 'Famous Blue Raincoat'. 'Somebody sued them on my behalf … and they did settle,' even though, he laughs, 'they hired a musicologist who said that particular motif was in the public domain and, in fact, could be traced back as far as Schubert.[3]
The same melody can be heard in Elton John's "Little Jeanie" in the lyrics: "Stepped into my life from a bad dream / Making the life that I had seem / Suddenly shiny and new"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_I_Need_You
John Clark, an attorney, sued for Cohen/Machat & Machat over this song. When it came time for Cohen to take a deposition he said “Marty, I don’t want to be deposed.” I explain to Steven that Cohen doesn’t want to be deposed or appear in court. He’s scared.
Steven tells me what Cohen and Kory should have done with respect to him: “We don’t want anything more with the Machat’s … you have 15% of everything Cohen created while Marty was the custodian.” Steven says “He is a fraud” about Cohen. We discuss what Cohen has done to Phil Spector and Steven says Phillip “should go after Cohen” for perjury, etc He then describes a conversation he had with his father. Steven asked Marty “Why do you like this guy? He doesn’t look at you.” Ultimately, Marty, who had been ripped off in the past by clients, said “You’re right. Fuck you’re right. Fuck him.” Just before he died, Marty told Steven “Stay with Phil. Don’t lose Phil.” Steven is confused about what happened with Phillip. We discuss the fact that there was so much confusion at the time of Marty’s death and agree that much of it arose from Cohen and Avril Giacobbi. Steven tells me a story about Peter Gabriel phoning up Steven and discussing a “curse” he thought Avril put on Steven’s daughter. This upset Steven because he didn’t know what to do with that information as he informed Peter. We also discuss the fact that the Machat’s suing me confused many people – including Phillip and Peter Gabriel. Steven and I agree – Cheryl Machat was behind the lawsuit. She felt I was involved with Avril. Steven knows that I never spoke to Avril again after the funeral. He believes Cheryl may have been jealous and was confused at that time. She apparently thought she and I would manage Cohen although she and I never discussed that. This would have been fine with me. I liked Cheryl. We agree that she’s a difficult individual and discuss the incident between her and Cohen. Steven thinks it may have occurred in Montreal or Los Angeles sometime prior to 1974.
Steven then tells me “I met Cohen’s guy from Mt. Baldy.” I explain that Cohen broke Roshi’s heart in half and sent me to see him with $9500 in cash and a note basically telling Roshi that Cohen left him for another whore – Ramesh Balsekar.
We end up talking about Phillip again. I comment that it’s interesting, karmically, that Steven and I have stood by Phillip. Steven tells me that Philip didn’t even ask him to. I tell him that Phillip didn’t ask me to either and we talk about the night I met with Phillip after the Clarkson incident and what he told me actually happened. Steven tells me Clarkson shot herself. We discuss F. Lee Bailey’s evidence on-line and how outrageous it is that LAPD is aware of this and hasn’t done anything. Steven asks me who the murderer was and I say some Latino guy, I believe, and note that I had already heard this story about a failed drug deal from the brother of an LAPD homicide detective. Of course, none of this is all that shocking to me and Steven. We also discuss Barry Bonds. Steven mentions that it was absurd that some DA was digging around in the garbage. I assure Steven that they all dig around in the garbage so what’s unusual about that. He says Anderson can legally be forced to sit in jail (after I say he has 5th Amendment rights) but does agree – he can sue for false imprisonment afterwards and the tape was illegal. Somehow we end up discussing Baby Doll Gibson. Steven is shocked that this was concealed from the jury. He says it’s an outrage that Phillip was told Gibson could testify only if he took the stand. He says that the Gibson matter is a reversible error. Then I mention Raoul Julia’s son and the fact that his testimony was concealed from Phillip’s jury. Steven tells me a story about Raoul Julia and “Street Fighter.” Steven asked Raoul Julia why he wanted to be in the film. Raoul Julia told him for his sons. He then tells Steven that he only has six months to live and he wants to spend it with his sons. This struck Steven hard. I tell Steven that Raoul Julia was a student of the 16th Karmapa and actually thought the 16th Karmapa and I were having dinner together at a hotel in Los Angeles one night – it was actually Dzigar Kongtrul Rinpoche who blessed the set of “Hamlet.” Steven served as music attorney on “Street Fighter.”
At the end of the conversation Steven told me that Marty died because Avril never took him to get his “lungs cleared.”
I mention that Marty viewed Phillip as one of his sons. Steven tells me his father told him “Phil could be your older brother.” We agree – Marty would be proud of us for standing by Phillip.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)