Question about Pamela Corson
TMeltreger
I have a question about Jim's girlfriend Pamela Corson. Did he marry her?
I don't think so, and if, in fact, he didn't marry her - why did she take his
last name for her gravestone? She is buried in a cemetery in my neighborhood.
If he did marry her - why is he buried in Paris and she in the US??
Burning questions, eh? Any response appreciated!
Tim
tcb
she took his name. Jim specifically said he wanted to be buried in Paris. I'm
sure Pam was too strung out to give a damn.
tcb
tcb
tcb
poesp...@my-dejanews.com
is recognized as full legal matrimony in accordance w/certain qualifying
conditions/locations. Very curious myself as to whether their obvious long
term relationship obtained this status.. ~poesparrow
>
> TMeltreger wrote:
>
> > Hello to Doors fans!
> >
> > I have a question about Jim's girlfriend Pamela Corson. Did he marry her?
> >
> > I don't think so, and if, in fact, he didn't marry her - why did she take
his
> > last name for her gravestone? She is buried in a cemetery in my
neighborhood.
> >
> > If he did marry her - why is he buried in Paris and she in the US??
> >
> > Burning questions, eh? Any response appreciated!
> >
> > Tim
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
bydivin...@mcleodusa.net
poesp...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> There is a pesky little issue of what is called "common law marriage", which
> is recognized as full legal matrimony in accordance w/certain qualifying
> conditions/locations. Very curious myself as to whether their obvious long
> term relationship obtained this status.. ~poesparrow
Obviously moreso than the minimal "intrusion" of perhaps one month total when
the tally is tolled.....
signed... one with as much to lose in the telling, as any other obsessed and
infatuated dillusionist. (possibly more.)
DLyte99720
No they weren't married, but I've heard that they could be considered husband
and wife under common law.
>
>I don't think so, and if, in fact, he didn't marry her - why did she take his
>last name for her gravestone?
I believe Pamela adopted Jim's surname while he was still alive and used it
then, as well as on her gravestone...........this may somehow be relevant to
the common law as well.
She is buried in a cemetery in my
>neighborhood.
>
>If he did marry her - why is he buried in Paris and she in the US??
>
They're not married and Jim passed away in Paris, in which Pamela returned to
the United States and shortly after passed on.
Dee
DLyte99720
>sure Pam was too strung out to give a damn.
Yes, it seems he picked some wonderful company of bones at Pere LaChaise.
teehee......funny that she certainly had the gusto to do it while she was alive
and with Jim Morrison, but I suppose you could attribute that to her being 'too
strung out' as well....who knows. Although, if Jim did mind, during his
lifetime, he didn't seem to make a peep about it.
Dee
Cecrle
>In article <6tb1qn$6ej$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> poesp...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> There is a pesky little issue of what is called "common law marriage", which
>> is recognized as full legal matrimony in accordance w/certain qualifying
>> conditions/locations. Very curious myself as to whether their obvious long
>> term relationship obtained this status.. ~poesparrow
>
>Obviously moreso than the minimal "intrusion" of perhaps one month total when
>the tally is tolled.....
>
>signed... one with as much to lose in the telling, as any other obsessed and
>infatuated dillusionist. (possibly more.)
What the fuck do you smoke while cruising Usenet? I'm dying to know!
-FC
Fab521
>infatuated dillusionist. (possibly more.)
>
powerful/humble
Your signature is such a marriage of these two words....
How joyous it is to see them so rightfully co-habitate.......
fab
poesp...@my-dejanews.com
bydivin...@mcleodusa.net wrote:
> In article <6tb1qn$6ej$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> poesp...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > There is a pesky little issue of what is called "common law marriage", which
> > is recognized as full legal matrimony in accordance w/certain qualifying
> > conditions/locations. Very curious myself as to whether their obvious long
> > term relationship obtained this status.. ~poesparrow
>
> Obviously moreso than the minimal "intrusion" of perhaps one month total when
> the tally is tolled.....
>
> infatuated dillusionist. (possibly more.)
Ahhhhhh... I see. *S*
~poesparrow
SykoDelic
COURSON. She was NOT married to Jim Morrison but he referred to her as
his "cosmic mate". She was the only woman he would keep returning to
again and again and she was with him through most of his short life.
She herself started calling herself Mrs. Morrison and though she
alleged that they were married it is mostly decided to be untrue.
The reason Jim was buried in Paris was that he died there when he was
there for a 6 month exile-vacation with Pamela. She did'nt want his
funeral to be a "circus and a farce", so he was buried at the Pere La
Chaise with 5 mourners present. She returned to America and died there
3 years later.
For the whole story of Morrison's life get
"No One Here Gets Out Alive" by Jerry hopkins and Danny Sugerman.
Adios Amigos
SykoDelic
Surf Usenet at home, on the road, and by email -- always at Talkway.
http://www.talkway.com
themissinglink
>
> In article <6tc46g$q4d$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> bydivin...@mcleodusa.net wrote:
> > In article <6tb1qn$6ej$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> > poesp...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > > There is a pesky little issue of what is called "common law marriage", which
> > > is recognized as full legal matrimony in accordance w/certain qualifying
> > > conditions/locations. Very curious myself as to whether their obvious long
> > > term relationship obtained this status.. ~poesparrow
> >
> > Obviously moreso than the minimal "intrusion" of perhaps one month total when
> > the tally is tolled.....
> >
> > signed... one with as much to lose in the telling, as any other obsessed and
> > infatuated dillusionist. (possibly more.)
>
> Ahhhhhh... I see. *S*
> ~poesparrow
> >
I choose to receive this as an affectionate and "knowing" amen... but
for the sake of the record.... merely the ad continuum flashbacks and
obviously never to return grey matter. It makes me rather selfish in my
expectations to be read by brail.... kind of touch, but don't look!
Apologies for any unnecessary roughness or inconsiderate demands.
I choose to believe, as I always must with my sons, that those out there
far enough to have the skills to tune in, must devolop them and find
them strengthened by reason of exercise. (My sons are by far, the most
overworked and underpaid darlings in the universe!)----so you are in
good company.
themissinglink
I am starting to scare myself here.... somewhere earlier in the day, I
made a note of someone asking what I was smoking when I responded, at
times... I gather.
Anyway, I made a menta (such as it is) note to answer back, and jumped
on your post with the concerned correspondence. Please overlook all
inappropriate attention. Sheeeeesh.
DLyte99720
>"No One Here Gets Out Alive" by Jerry hopkins and Danny Sugerman.
>Adios Amigos
>SykoDelic
*guffaw*
Dee
bydivin...@mcleodusa.net
Cecrle <mce...@sbt.infi.net> wrote:
> bydivin...@mcleodusa.net wrote:
> >In article <6tb1qn$6ej$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> > poesp...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >> There is a pesky little issue of what is called "common law marriage",
which
> >> is recognized as full legal matrimony in accordance w/certain qualifying
> >> conditions/locations. Very curious myself as to whether their obvious long
> >> term relationship obtained this status.. ~poesparrow
> >
> >Obviously moreso than the minimal "intrusion" of perhaps one month total when
> >the tally is tolled.....
> >
> >signed... one with as much to lose in the telling, as any other obsessed and
> >infatuated dillusionist. (possibly more.)
>
>
> -FC
please refer to that correspondence, and may you both forgive my dyslexic
proclivities.
Janene2000
marriage because California is not a "common law" state.
In California a member of an unmarried couple may attempt to obtain support (or
"palimony") from the other upon seperation. This not the same as "common-law
marriage" which is, essentially, a state of marriage imposed upon a couple by
the state and requires a divorce to dissolve the marriage. Common-law
marriages can only occur when a couple meets ALL of the criteria (such as
living in one of the fourteen common-law states in the U.S., living as a couple
for a "significant" period of time, "holding themselves out" as a couple &
taking on the same last name.)
- J.W.
DLyte99720
>marriage because California is not a "common law" state.
Has it *always* been this way, or back in their day was it a "common law"
state?>Common-law
>marriages can only occur when a couple meets ALL of the criteria (such as
>living in one of the fourteen common-law states in the U.S., living as a
>couple
>for a "significant" period of time, "holding themselves out" as a couple &
>taking on the same last name.)
Yes, this is understood, but I did read somewhere that Jim and Pam fit into
these requirements.........maybe not within the state of California, but I
assume, then, it was meant that had they been living in a 'common law' state
the law would have applied to them.
Dee
themissinglink
Actually, my grandparents were common-law... though they lived together
for 30 years... I believe it takes 7 years (dwelling in the loose palace
of exile...!) ---so I guess there wasn't really enough time... though
she alone did he dedicate his beloved books and call is cosmic mate.
themissinglink
> > assume, then, it was meant that had they been living in a 'common law' state
> > the law would have applied to them.
> >
> > Dee
>
> Actually, my grandparents were common-law... though they lived together
> for 30 years... I believe it takes 7 years (dwelling in the loose palace
> of exile...!) ---so I guess there wasn't really enough time... though
> she alone did he dedicate his beloved books and call is cosmic mate.
ps-- though poetry and love letters are of a certainty possessed by
others, and each therein received a tremendous privilege and obvious
obsessive entitlement to swoon, as this was the nature of the man. Who
among us, that share the privilege of his "inheritance and bequeathal"
even as mere fans, do not share this tendency. But anyone that REALLY
knew him, knew the feeling of helpless jealousy, in the addiction of
desire, for his "one and only".... and her weaknesses did/do not take
away from the phenomenon of their "connection". Best to just enjoy what
truly was granted without wrath or malice... and let it be what it is.
Strange Days were had by all, in a strange land, and a very wonderful
stranger's hand, who moving purposefully through his final journey to
prepare for death he was certain of in Paris, and even at death, needed
and found, a Brand New Friend...the Man was at the Door, The End.
Ka...@aol.com
death. Apparently, she began using them to feel more in touch with Jim
after he died. The article at:
http://www.studentadvantage.com/arts/literature/980911ae_lt_01.html also
states that Jim's death had nothing to do with drugs at all. He was a
life-long asthmatic and being in Paris was of no help to his breathing.
They never did an autopsy because there was no need, he died of heart
failure. I don't know the article is actually a review from Patricia
Butler's book, "Angels Dance and Angels Die: The Tragic Romance of Pamela
and Jim Morrison."
> .........maybe not within the state of California, but I
> > > assume, then, it was meant that had they been living in a 'common law' state
> > > the law would have applied to them.
DLyte99720
>I have just read that Pamela was not even a drug user until after Jim's
>death. Apparently, she began using them to feel more in touch with Jim
>after he died. The article at:
>http://www.studentadvantage.com/arts/literature/980911ae_lt_01.html also
>states that Jim's death had nothing to do with drugs at all. He was a
>life-long asthmatic and being in Paris was of no help to his breathing.
>They never did an autopsy because there was no need, he died of heart
>failure. I don't know the article is actually a review from Patricia
>Butler's book, "Angels Dance and Angels Die: The Tragic Romance of Pamela
>and Jim Morrison."
Since you seem to be cutting and pasting this message to various boards, such
as the AOL board as well......here is my reply 'cut and pasted':
This article relays Patricia Butler's interpretation of the Facts.......which
is not necessarily the *absolute truth*. Mind you the article also states that
Jim Morrison and Patricia Kennealy were never married in a handfasting
ceremony, yet Patricia Kennealy certainly has documentation to prove (i.e.
signatures of her, Morrison, and witnessing Priest and Priestess) that the
ceremony took place, and she includes a photograph of the document in *her*
book.
Please don't take for granted that *everything* in print is true.............
There are other people who say Pamela was known to use heroin in her lifetime
to keep her weight down, but who knows which version is accurate, I surely
don't.
Also, Jim Morrison may have died from heart faluire, but that is like saying
Jimi Hendrix died from heart failure as well...........one happened to be an
overdose and the *cause* of the other is, at least, questionable.
Dee
Atheme
ways. In the event you don't want to know, just delete me ok?? :o) Yes I did, and
yes I did. It was a experience I am glad I took, but I would not do it again, not
that I had regrets for then, but would not, in this day and age try it. As the world
is not what it use to be, neither is the drugs. It would scare me to do most of what
is on the streets these days. Not to mention the world is a different place, and
would not want to go outside the doors of my own home tripping. Last thing I want to
do is bump in to some gang-banger while tripping my brains out. (no disrespect
directed towards any g-bangers). In retrospect, I would advise more natural things
like shrooms or peyote, for attempted trips.. But I, now much older and wiser,
would not even do these any more. And as a mommy of 3 teens, I would ask that none
of you try any of the above. Reality can suck, but it's real and it's all we have..
So learn to accept it and deal with it.... :o) Trish
Highw@y wrote:
<some snipping>
> Have you ever tried LSD?
>
> Did you like it?
>
> Curious Joe
Atheme
I kind of hope it is not all we have... if so, I want a refund.....
Trish
Miz Scarlett wrote:
> Atheme <ath...@azstarnet.com> wrote:
>
> >Reality can suck, but it's real and it's all we have..
> >So learn to accept it and deal with it.... :o) Trish
>
> 1. Define "reality."
> 2. Define "real."
> 3. What makes you so sure it's "all we have?" ;-)
VARYKINA
There was even some guy who posted on the board (AOL Doors board) a while ago
saying we were all nuts and that he was part of their crowd in the 60's and
they all did drugs. You cannot believe everything you read. Pamela was a known
drug user way before Paris. So were/are a lot of other people. But to state
that she didn't use drugs until after Paris is, in my opinion, ludicrous.
Miz Scarlett
Awfully big of you to admit it is merely your opinion. Otherwise I might
be tempted to think you're claiming you were part of their crowd and they
*didn't* all do drugs....hmmm?
And Vary---you cannot believe everything you read ;-)
Miz Scarlett
Cassandra Glockner
law they were married just not before a judge or religious figure. The
reason she is not buried in Paris is she is not a French citizian but
Jim was buried their because of who he was. But the French are trying
to have his body moved back to the U.S. because he is not French and
they don't have the room to keep no-French people their. But the
Goverment is under alot of pressure to keep him their because he was Jim
Morrison. Just look how he is buried next to.
JG
"It's not what a teenager knows that bothers his parents- it's how he
found out."
DLyte99720
>A popular urban legend is that lsd is cut with speed
>or strychtnine, which when you think about it is quite ludicrous. I would
>think the only reason to cut a drug w/ something, is to make it appear to
>be more than it is, and with something that is de facto invisible, what's
>the point?
>
Actually, it all comes down to profit. Mix in a little of the good stuff with
the pharmaceuticals (bad stuff) and you've got your self a purchase that will
go a long way in profit, for the dealer.
This is just one of the reasons why drugs these days are so damn dangerous.
Drugs aren't cut with other *stuff* to make it appear more than it
is....................the only more that is relelvant here is more money
rolling into the drug dealers and more people who get screwed up by the unknown
shit put into the product.
Speed or stryctnine isn't so ludicrous when you remember that the people
handing out the drugs are interested in mula mula mula! not the purchaser or
the high.....
Beware kiddies.....there are big bad wolves out there.
Dee
Matthew Montchalin
>Atheme <ath...@azstarnet.com> wrote:
>>Reality can suck, but it's real and it's all we have..
>>So learn to accept it and deal with it.... :o) Trish
Miz Scarlett wrote:
>1. Define "reality."
>2. Define "real."
>3. What makes you so sure it's "all we have?" ;-)
What makes her think I can deal with it?
--
Re...@this.newgroup
I agree. I don't know what sort of adulterants one finds in acid
these days, but in the late 60's - early 70's both strychnine and
speed were very common cuts.
Strychnine was used because, in small doses, it has a
quasi-psychedelic effect and is cheaper to produce than acid.
Speed was used to jack-up the acid high.
It had the additional effect of decreasing the time it would
take to come on. (Well, nobody ever said that Americans are patient)
At that time the LA free clinic had a program going where you could
bring in a sample dose and they would analyze it for you.
A public service of sorts.
The Free Press would print a summary of the results every so
often. The garbage people would use to cut drugs was mind boggling.
Often, what was being sold was not LSD at all. I believe one batch of
shit was traced to Fort Detreich, MD. Some sort of biological warfare
agent designed to instantly induce psychosis. Brrrr......
Joe is correct about the dangers of the "natural" agents though.
A friend of mine took some mushrooms and passed out, turned blue,
had convulsions...the whole nine yards.
Don't recall if it was the dosage (Very unreliable) or some kind of
toxic fungus growing on the shrooms.
Re...@this.newgroup
Phil
Re...@this.newgroup wrote in message
<3604a7ec...@news.earthlink.net>...
>
>Joe is correct about the dangers of the "natural" agents though.
>A friend of mine took some mushrooms and passed out, turned blue,
>had convulsions...the whole nine yards.
>
>Don't recall if it was the dosage (Very unreliable) or some kind of
>toxic fungus growing on the shrooms.
>
It's easy...stay away from fresh Fly Agaric...it has to be dried first.
If possible stick to liberty caps...50 to start off with. Boil them because
parasitc worm lavae live in the gills underneath the hood. Make sure the
gills are black underneath, not white, and always boil them. Make tea from
the water and drink that first, then eat the boiled mushrooms later...gives
you a longer, more intense peak. Brilliant, never had a bad one.
DLyte99720
>Depending on the agent, I suppose. It's
>conceivable to drop some crystal meth on a sugar cube, along with some
>acid, but to me, this concept presupposes that speed would be a easily
>available and inexpensive adulterant. As w/ blotter the amount of speed
>one could cram
>onto that small square seems negligble, and in the case of the larger
>agent, it seems that it would drive the cost of a relatively cheap acid
>trip up.
You have a point about the crystal meth....it seems people go to extemem
lengths to boil that foul crap up...........I was speaking about cutting the
primary drug up with pharmaceuticals, which can include a variety of
amphetamines or barbituates, whatever the evil scientist sees fit.
I don't think crystal meth was around in the 60s, or at least was not
manufactured as it is today (which, in itself....the only expensive factor is
that it takes a lot of time....the chemical components aren't the most costly
part). The pharmaceuticals that one can come by, I suppose, if you're "in the
business" can be bought in bulk enabling one to produce a larger volume of
product that is disproportionate to the amount of "label drug" that it
contains.
For example, acid can be mixed in with god only knows what in order to make a
little bit of the product go farther.
It's like taking a diamond necklace..breaking it apart.....mixing it in with
glass and creating 20 necklaces to sell........as if they were all
diamonds......like I said...it's all profit.....and never underestimate the
money makers...especially when it comes to drugs (there's no room to be naive).
Like I said before....big bad wolves.
Dee
NLbitch
Ladies, ladies, didnt we grow out of this in kindergarten or did only one of
you two?!!!!
Re...@this.newgroup
>
>>Depending on the agent, I suppose. It's
>>conceivable to drop some crystal meth on a sugar cube, along with some
>>acid, but to me, this concept presupposes that speed would be a easily
>>available and inexpensive adulterant. As w/ blotter the amount of speed
>>one could cram
>>onto that small square seems negligble, and in the case of the larger
>>agent, it seems that it would drive the cost of a relatively cheap acid
>>trip up.
Well, remember that in the period i was speaking of (late 60's),
most acid came in tab form - Blue Barrel, Orange Sunshine, etc.
You could grind up any kind of shit you wanted & moosh it all
together. It wouldn't have to be crystal per se. Cross top whites
were selling 10 for a dollar.
(Gee, I'm starting to sound like my dad talking about all the
stuff you could buy for a nickel during the depression) :-}
>I don't think crystal meth was around in the 60s, or at least was not
>manufactured as it is today (which, in itself....the only expensive factor is
>that it takes a lot of time....the chemical components aren't the most costly
>part). The pharmaceuticals that one can come by, I suppose, if you're "in the
>business" can be bought in bulk enabling one to produce a larger volume of
>product that is disproportionate to the amount of "label drug" that it
>contains.
It was around in some form or other.
Remember Jims abortive "Speed Kills" spot for the Do It Now
foundation?
The Speed they were talking about was some form of injectable Meth,
not bennies or dexies, which were not considered to be terribly
dangerous.
All of that stuff was incredibly cheap and was of pharmaceutical
quality.
The controls must have been much looser at that time.
DLyte99720
>It was around in some form or other.
>Remember Jims abortive "Speed Kills" spot for the Do It Now
> foundation?
> The Speed they were talking about was some form of injectable Meth,
>not bennies or dexies, which were not considered to be terribly
>dangerous.
>All of that stuff was incredibly cheap and was of pharmaceutical
>quality.
>The controls must have been much looser at that time.
>
Oh yes......the mention of that attempt at a public service announcement jogged
the ol' memory.
I have my doubts that the 'controls' are all that tight these days =) With
Backroad Bill mixing the shit up in his basement? Nah........
Dee
JENN...@webtv.net
~Pami~
themissinglink
>
> >
> >>Depending on the agent, I suppose. It's
> >>conceivable to drop some crystal meth on a sugar cube, along with some
> >>acid, but to me, this concept presupposes that speed would be a easily
> >>available and inexpensive adulterant. As w/ blotter the amount of speed
> >>one could cram
> >>onto that small square seems negligble, and in the case of the larger
> >>agent, it seems that it would drive the cost of a relatively cheap acid
> >>trip up.
>
> Well, remember that in the period i was speaking of (late 60's),
> most acid came in tab form - Blue Barrel, Orange Sunshine, etc.
> You could grind up any kind of shit you wanted & moosh it all
> together. It wouldn't have to be crystal per se. Cross top whites
>
> were selling 10 for a dollar.
> (Gee, I'm starting to sound like my dad talking about all the
> stuff you could buy for a nickel during the depression) :-}
>
> >I don't think crystal meth was around in the 60s, or at least was not
> >manufactured as it is today (which, in itself....the only expensive factor is
> >that it takes a lot of time....the chemical components aren't the most costly
> >part). The pharmaceuticals that one can come by, I suppose, if you're "in the
> >business" can be bought in bulk enabling one to produce a larger volume of
> >product that is disproportionate to the amount of "label drug" that it
> >contains.
>
> Remember Jims abortive "Speed Kills" spot for the Do It Now
> foundation?
> The Speed they were talking about was some form of injectable Meth,
> not bennies or dexies, which were not considered to be terribly
> dangerous.
> All of that stuff was incredibly cheap and was of pharmaceutical
> quality.
> The controls must have been much looser at that time.
They were so loose that acid was legal for the first couple of years of
its popularity, tho you could go to jail for 5-10 for grass possession.
Meth and crystal were the VERY prevalent and pervading "fix" of LA, far
moreso that acid in the early years. Jim mixed the personality of the
"roughness" of the Hollywood underground into the acid high...(in
contrast with the SF persona. He was the BAD BOY of acid... as opposed
to the flower power of LSD mainstream. LA was a very cold and brazen old
whore who looked TERRIBLE in the daylight in her rollers and smeared
mascara... but at night... watch out! SF had a more insipid quality
that tried to decorate the drug consciousness with epervescense..(sp?)
Jim had the rude manner of lifting the leaves of the "flowers" and
revealing the dogshit hidden under the surface. He was basically too
iconaclastic for SF temperament. But he sure ruled LA. You had to
respect the brazen honesty of Hollyweird underbelly, though it was cold
and dangerous. Jim, I believe, was so far ahead in seeing the breakdown
of inevitability that he bugged his peers, and band included who were
far more Maharishi oriented... and it took generation X to recognize the
gutteral clarity with which he prophesied.
Anyway... acid surely WAS cut in the "decline" with both the strychnine
and speed, and it hurt your neck and became an oppressive intrusion (for
those that favored acid, which of course was my mainstay.) Crystal and
crank were everywhere, along with the damage done. And as has been
stated here, take care, for not only is the current season more violent
at a street level, and the "mixes" obviously more to be wary, but the
spirit realm itself is shaking so violently that it makes for far less
user friendly trips I would be sure.. if you do not feel secure in
ruling your spirit. Take care and play nicely kids.
Atheme
Talk about some memories... sinsemilla.... I can taste it now... And my
personal fav, red bud... Those were the days my friend... Trish
Miz Scarlett wrote:
"Hurt your neck...." YESSSS! I can still remember my neck turning intoa
board virtually everytime I dropped. Damn, I hated acid. Give mesome good
sinsemilla anytime. Made me giggle, made me psychic, made theworld as
beautiful as when I was a child, made me hor....ahem, never mind.
Miz Scarlett
>Re...@this.newgroup wrote:
"Hurt your neck...." YESSSS! I can still remember my neck turning into
a board virtually everytime I dropped. Damn, I hated acid. Give me
DLyte99720
>And as has been
>stated here, take care, for not only is the current season more violent
>at a street level, and the "mixes" obviously more to be wary, but the
>spirit realm itself is shaking so violently that it makes for far less
>user friendly trips I would be sure.. if you do not feel secure in
>ruling your spirit. Take care and play nicely kids.
>
>
and how! dEE
NothingV
>Oh, man. I CANNOT handle acid. The stuff does insane shit to my head. I
>don't even like reefer-makes me paranoid.
me too. paranoia all around. its awful.
nothing
Miz Scarlett
No argument here. You have to be VERY VERY careful with grass, because
it will magnify whatever's in your psyche to a power of 10 at least. When
it's good it's very, very good, and when it's bad it's truly horrendous.
But *when* it's good, it's the best, the only....
Miz Scarlett
>Can't agree. Of course, this is based on personal taste, so I won't make
>any of those reefer-is-only-for-hippie-losers generalizations.
Thanks. Big of you.
>
>But for me, coke is the ultimate. Two or three snorts, and I'm in heaven!
Chemistry, darlin', it's all chemistry. Coke never did anything for me
that a goodly jolt of java couldn't do & without a hangover to boot...
>--
>"People say we're electronic, but we're not. There are no synthesizers or
>even keyboards in Depeche Mode. We make make music by distorting sound
>clips of bodily functions and piecing them together just so."
>-Martin Gore
>
><^-^>
>
>Miz Scarlett <d...@rt66.com> wrote in article
nhaynes
Oh brother, what a bunch of god-damn wussies we've got in here! I'm
kidding...sort of...
Jack Aamot
> I have just read that Pamela was not even a drug user until after Jim's
> death. Apparently, she began using them to feel more in touch with Jim
> after he died. The article at:
> http://www.studentadvantage.com/arts/literature/980911ae_lt_01.html also
> states that Jim's death had nothing to do with drugs at all. He was a
> life-long asthmatic and being in Paris was of no help to his breathing.
> They never did an autopsy because there was no need, he died of heart
> failure. I don't know the article is actually a review from Patricia
> Butler's book, "Angels Dance and Angels Die: The Tragic Romance of Pamela
> and Jim Morrison."
>
> > .........maybe not within the state of California, but I
> > > > assume, then, it was meant that had they been living in a 'common
law' state
> > > > the law would have applied to them.
> found, a Brand New Friend...the Man was at the Door, The End.
I am not sure, but I read somewhere that Pam was heavily into heroin. Jim
did not approve of this and was always trying to get her to quit. Well,
as the story goes; Jim came home one night after drinking with his buddies
and found a pile of white powder on the table. Thinking it was coke he
snorted a fat line. It turns out that it was heroin. The heroin caused
his heart to stop, and he died. So in answer to your question; no, I
believe that Pam was using drugs while Jim was still alive. If you have a
different story I would like to hear it. Thank You.
Miz Scarlett
>
>I read in a Janis Joplin bio that she shot crystal meth. I was supprised
>because I did'nt thnk they used that term back than.
Sure we did, although mostly we called it speed, which I guess is still
true today....
bydivin...@mcleodusa.net
do you remember Donovan? He played a wonderful number called "The Trip" AT
The Trip, which was the club on Sunset where the Byrd's made their homebase.
One night, Donavan, as so many of the English tripper's liked to come partake
and strut in the Very Underbelly that was the "scene" in Hollyweird then....
did an amazing, translucently pale-skinned demonstration of the crystal meth
addiction which was the RAGE at that time..trying to think of the hotel
"meth" as it was known then, up the strip ---I can get there in my mind's eye
stupor, but even the memory of my grey cells pertaining to that period of
time, are misty and intuitive...maybe R--something....oh dear, at the base of
the hills, north side... a mile or so east of the clubs... Hyatt,,,,no....
cheesier...very in, very f****d up.
anyway... I remember him singing the anthem that had everyone screaming with
alma mater pride... "I was a trip--trip--trippin' on Sunset....
the whole wide human race has taken far to much Meth`-A-Drinnnnnnn!
and it breaks into.... "what goes on?----cheeker cheek(or something like
that)... what goes on--I REALLY wanna know!"
Oh dear...I surely shouldn't be stretching my banks in this direction! But
yes,all references to crystal, which were plentiful in the songs of that
particular yore.... were of a certainty... that nasty stuff.... and shooting
was the only way to be part of the mainstream. (I was very relieved when acid
hit.)
When I started hanging and working at the club I mentioned, I had a
proclivity of wearing a baby pacifier to aggravate my teachers on the day or
two I would show up at school. I have amusedly noticed some ot the kids today
wearing them as a fairly basic tool of whatever... geeze, anything can become
"hip". It was a funny key into Alice's trapdoor at that time however, because
I unwittingly attracted the coolest junkie, who must have thought I was
radaring him.... he promptly took the pacifier and fashioned an "outfit" out
of it by using string and a medical dropper with a point attached by the
string. It was the VERY avante garde syringe of that time and space. weird. I
had a nose for trouble all right.
What am I doing here... forgive my senility.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
themissinglink
>
> In article <6up8d8$qkl$2...@news.rt66.com>,
> Miz Scarlett <d...@rt66.com> wrote:
> > JENN...@webtv.net wrote:
> > >
> > >I read in a Janis Joplin bio that she shot crystal meth. I was supprised
> > >because I did'nt thnk they used that term back than.
> >
> > Sure we did, although mostly we called it speed, which I guess is still
> > true today....
> >
> >
>
> do you remember Donovan? He played a wonderful number called "The Trip" AT
> The Trip, which was the club on Sunset where the Byrd's made their homebase.
(I believe it was the Crescendo before it switched to the Trip...
..trying to think of the hotel
> "meth" as it was known then, up the strip ---I can get there in my mind's eye
> stupor, but even the memory of my grey cells pertaining to that period of
> time, are misty and intuitive...maybe R--something....oh dear, at the base of
> the hills, north side... a mile or so east of the clubs... Hyatt,,,,no....
> cheesier...very in, very f****d up.
>
Maybe "King's" something, so of course it got referred to as "Queen's"
something else.
Someone, help me in my weakness, puhleeze....breaking free from this
thread with determination.........
themissinglink
> >
> Maybe "King's" something, so of course it got referred to as "Queen's"
> something else.
"Arms" comes to mind,,,, but then that would be SO culturally cheesy as
to completely rule out sanity... could be.... then again.... it is
DEFINITELY TIME for me to depart from these netherworlds.... jeeze... if
I am this lightheadedly returning to the "roots" of my depravity, how
will I prevail....
SILENCING the elemental spirits and the powers that be.... with grim
determination..... I joyfully embark!
Janene2000
>To my knowledge California has common law marridges.
There are no "common-law" marriages in CA because it is not one of the fourteen
U.S. common-law states. Here in CA, a member of an unmarried couple may
attempt to sue the other for support ("palimony") under very specific
conditions-- even then (s)he may not win.
This is very different than a common-law marriage, which is essentially a state
of marriage imposed on a couple by the state which requires a legal divorce to
dissolve. There a few specific criteria which must *all* be met to deem a
union a common-law. It is not, as most people think, simply a matter of living
together for X number of years.
BTW, I have no personal investment in whether or not Jim was married and if so,
to whom.
TerriRites
<<states that Jim's death had nothing to do with drugs at all. He was a
life-long asthmatic and being in Paris was of no help to his breathing.
They never did an autopsy because there was no need, he died of heart
failure. I don't know the article is actually a review from Patricia
Butler's book, "Angels Dance and Angels Die: The Tragic Romance of Pamela
and Jim Morrison.">>
Something is very wrong with this whole scenario. Bulter's conclusion that
Jim's death was completely natural just doesn't fit the facts. This asthmatic
problem is difficult to believe. Certainly others would have seen him suffer
from a problem chronic enough to kill him at 27 years. Not many consider
Bulter's telling of the tale to be completely factual. In fact, many, on both
sides of the Pam/Patricia issue think much of it is rubbish.
Most of it is taken from the Max Fink transcript, in which he contridicts
himself excessively.
On Jim's death, however... Alain Ronay provided some very insightful views on
the matter, being that he was there immediately after and during the aftermath
of Jim's death. This article was published in a European magazine and is
difficult to get a hold of. I've read it, and much of Alain's account can't be
disputed by simple "errors in translation and misinterpretation" although many
have tried.
I've never believed for a moment that Pam had any intentional hand in the death
of Jim. That would be completely out of character, especially since she
obviously needed him so much. However, there were some strange maneuverings
after Jim's death that would lead one to believe that she felt somewhat
responsible, albeit, indirectly, and was concerned about criminal reprocussions
in regard to her herion habit and Jim's demise.
(By the way, Particia Butler is one of very few that contend that Pamela did
not use herion until after Jim's death. It more often agreed upon that she did
with her habit increasing after Jim's death.)
The fact that there was no autopsy on a 27 year old decedent, with a healthy
outward appearance is unfathomable. If I remember correctly, either Pam or
someone in her camp knew the Dr. that first recorded Jim's death.
The death and burial was kept quite secret as we all know, with even days
passing before Jim's family was notified. Perhaps they would have demanded an
autopsy at the time before burial.
Getting Pam out of the country was paramount and she made a very hasty exit...
it would seem only natural that she would want to leave quickly, but there
seemed to be an urgency that went deeper than Jim's death alone.
Alain Ronay's account of hurriedly discarding Pam's herion made him seem a bit
suspicious of her. Pam was also burning things in the fireplace immidately
after his arrival. He was not able to see what she was destroying.
Pam confessed to confidants (one being Danny Sugerman, I believe) that she was
responsible for Jim's death. She confessed that he accidentally snorted her
herion thinking it was cocaine.
We all know that Jim's health was failing at a young age due to his abuse of
alcohol as well as his penchant for physically endangering himself. Still, his
health seemed to have been satisfactory at the very least and a random heart
seizure seems unlikely for someone his age.
Based on the accounts of those who spent time with him in his last days..
including his private doctor who saw him before leaving for Paris, I believe
that his death was accidental... or precipitated by his own doing
intentionally.
I believe chances are good that he knew the substance Pam had stashed was
herion. Perhaps he chose to give it a try for the sake of adventure and it
proved disasterous. On the other hand, perhaps he chose the drug as an easy,
painless way to free himself from life as he was growing despondent. The least
likely, but possible scenario is that his heart simply gave out. Or that the
respitory infection he had contracted before going to Paris resulted in a blood
clot to the lung or heart. (Remember he had that frighteningly high fever while
staying with Patricia Kennealy before going to Paris.)
It doesn't seem too unlikely that he would commit suicide when you factor in
his great fear of incarceration, which seemed envitable after the Miami
incident. Also, his admitted lack of concentration on his work and personal
disgust with himself for his inability to quit drinking. Consider also his
relationship difficulties. All of this is difficult to bear for man now
entering a new level of maturity.
He seemed to be at a real crossroads in his life and changing the direction of
his future was occupying much of his thoughts. (which by the way, many people
also experience at the age of 27. There are some stastical and astrological
data that supports this).
He expressed regret for many of his actions and was depressed about his career
and inability to make decisions and complete his desired self-improvement.
Psychologically, he seems to have been in rather a prime state of mind for
suicide.
The reason for Jim's death is a mystery, and will always be, most likely. Only
an autopsy would prove the presence or absence of herion in his system and an
autopsy is very unlikely to ever be performed. Even if it was, it can never be
proven whether or not Jim's death was brought about accidentally or
intentionally by himself, or even another (which I believe is unlikely.) If
there were no traces of herion in his system, then his death would obviously be
due to natural causes, but really, how likely is that?
Common sense asserts that many factors should be taken into account and from
there it's easier to come to conclusions. But our conclusions will never be
proven, so this is all we have.
Sorry about the length of this post, but is there really anyway to run down
this event completely *and* briefly at the same time?
Terri
TerriRites
<< Last thing I want to
do is bump in to some gang-banger while tripping my brains out. (no disrespect
directed towards any g-bangers). >>
Ha ha, Trish. That's okay. I think we can disrespect gang-bangers. :)
Terri
TerriRites
Diey writes:
<<Oh, man. I CANNOT handle acid. The stuff does insane shit to my head. I
don't even like reefer-makes me paranoid. I CAN honestly say I used to be
the single biggest cokehead on the planet, though. Lord, do I love that
nose candy.>>
I'm with you. I hate tripping. I've never had a good trip. Every one of them
was a nightmare. Yes, even weed can make life miserable for a while. I've had
some terrible times smoking with people who neglected to tell me that they had
laced their stuff. PCP was the most horrifying experience for me. I believe the
experts when they say it could make you permanently lose your mind.
Coke was terrific though. Coming of age during the Regan era meant money in
your pocket , pretty white mountains on the coffee table, and a smile on your
face. (But TERRIBLE music)
But that's all changed. I wouldn't touch coke now. I agree with Dee's
assessment on "cutting". Cutting coke is tres easy, profitable, and extremely
dangerous. It was nice while it lasted, but it couldn't last forever. Besides,
if we kept it up... we never would have been able to afford these computers.
Hell, we would never have been able to afford a pair of shoes.
If I smoke pot now, it's only one hit once in a blue moon. That does it. Just
enough of a buzz to make you smile without worry of forgetting how to breathe
(has anyone else ever been through that???)
Terri
Fab521
Hi Terri.....
>PCP was the most horrifying experience for me. I believe the
>experts when they say it could make you permanently lose your mind.
Yea, me too.....one time while smoking at a party in high school I was sure I
was dying......totally freaked. Like it was the end of the world.
>Coke was terrific though. Coming of age during the Regan era meant money in
>your pocket , pretty white mountains on the coffee table, and a smile on your
>face. (But TERRIBLE music)
I thought cocaine was the greatest drug ever...I was the coolest chick in the
world on cocaine.......the most beautiful, the most interesting and
intelligent.......hahahha......what a joke....I'd never do it again, it's the
stupidest thing in the world.
Oh sure Terri.....the music of the time sucked, in retrospect.....but at the
time....along with everything else it was so COOL..........
>But that's all changed. I wouldn't touch coke now. I agree with Dee's
>assessment on "cutting". Cutting coke is tres easy, profitable, and extremely
>dangerous. It was nice while it lasted, but it couldn't last forever.
>Besides,
>if we kept it up... we never would have been able to afford these computers.
And I watched so many people lose every thing that they had.....including
themselves. Very very sad.
>Hell, we would never have been able to afford a pair of shoes.
>
>If I smoke pot now, it's only one hit once in a blue moon. That does it. Just
>enough of a buzz to make you smile without worry of forgetting how to breathe
>(has anyone else ever been through that???)
Oh my God......yes. Forgetting how to breathe.....thinking while you were
stoned that breathing in fact was a voluntary function......like you had to
remember to do it......
Back in those days we used to roll joint after joint.......and get goofy and
laugh.......the quality of pot these days is dramatically different......I
don't like it at all.......paranoia city for me.
fab.......class of '79 stoner
DLyte99720
In article <19980930182204...@ng93.aol.com>, fab...@aol.com
(Fab521) writes:
>And I watched so many people lose every thing that they had.....including
>themselves. Very very sad.
Yes......now, aint that the truth.
>
>>Hell, we would never have been able to afford a pair of shoes.
>>
>>If I smoke pot now, it's only one hit once in a blue moon. That does it.
>Just
>>enough of a buzz to make you smile without worry of forgetting how to
>breathe
>>(has anyone else ever been through that???)
>
>Oh my God......yes. Forgetting how to breathe.....thinking while you were
>stoned that breathing in fact was a voluntary function......like you had to
>remember to do it......
>Back in those days we used to roll joint after joint.......and get goofy and
>laugh.......the quality of pot these days is dramatically different......I
>don't like it at all.......paranoia city for me.
I've learned to be very careful who, if anyone's, funky shit is
utilized.........I've had some horrible experiences..........I don't know about
yesteryears buddah, but today's is certainly funked up.
Dee
DLyte99720
In article <19980930040903...@ng62.aol.com>, terri...@aol.com
(TerriRites) writes:
> This asthmatic
>problem is difficult to believe.
Right, but it is not an impossibility.
>Certainly others would have seen him suffer
>from a problem chronic enough to kill him at 27 years.
It was described as the reappearance of chronic asthma, meaning it got him at
his weak point...........................If that was the case, imagine putting
your body through hell, needing recovery time, and having asthma reappear -
what a bee-atch!
> In fact, many, on both
>sides of the Pam/Patricia issue think much of it is rubbish.
?? I didn't think his death was a Pam/Patrica issue......better yet, there is a
Pam/Patricia issue???????
>
>Most of it is taken from the Max Fink transcript, in which he contridicts
>himself excessively.
*That* document is highly questionable indeed........
>
>On Jim's death, however... Alain Ronay provided some very insightful views on
>the matter, being that he was there immediately after and during the
>aftermath
>of Jim's death. This article was published in a European magazine and is
>difficult to get a hold of. I've read it, and much of Alain's account can't
>be
>disputed by simple "errors in translation and misinterpretation" although
>many
>have tried.
Actually someone had relayed that Alain himself was quoted as commenting that
his quotes were taking out of context in that article............that has
nothing to do with translation and misinterpreation, right?
>However, there were some strange maneuverings
>after Jim's death that would lead one to believe that she felt somewhat
>responsible, albeit, indirectly, and was concerned about criminal
>reprocussions
>in regard to her herion habit and Jim's demise.
Plus, she must have completely freaked and frazzled that Jim had died.
>Getting Pam out of the country was paramount and she made a very hasty
>exit...
>it would seem only natural that she would want to leave quickly, but there
>seemed to be an urgency that went deeper than Jim's death alone.
If you are making assumptions here, then yes, there was an urgency.
>Pam confessed to confidants (one being Danny Sugerman, I believe) that she
>was
>responsible for Jim's death. She confessed that he accidentally snorted her
>herion thinking it was cocaine.
ah -- Danny Sugerman: one moment a sensational Jimographer, the next a credible
source.........................
>We all know that Jim's health was failing at a young age due to his abuse of
>alcohol as well as his penchant for physically endangering himself. Still,
>his
>health seemed to have been satisfactory at the very least and a random heart
>seizure seems unlikely for someone his age.
Does alcoholism increase the probability for heart problems? Just
wondering.......
>
>Based on the accounts of those who spent time with him in his last days..
>including his private doctor who saw him before leaving for Paris, I believe
>that his death was accidental... or precipitated by his own doing
>intentionally.
Seems so............
>
>I believe chances are good that he knew the substance Pam had stashed was
>herion. Perhaps he chose to give it a try for the sake of adventure and it
>proved disasterous. On the other hand, perhaps he chose the drug as an easy,
>painless way to free himself from life as he was growing despondent. The
>least
>likely, but possible scenario is that his heart simply gave out. Or that the
>respitory infection he had contracted before going to Paris resulted in a
>blood
>clot to the lung or heart. (Remember he had that frighteningly high fever
>while
>staying with Patricia Kennealy before going to Paris.)
>
>It doesn't seem too unlikely that he would commit suicide when you factor in
>his great fear of incarceration, which seemed envitable after the Miami
>incident. Also, his admitted lack of concentration on his work and personal
>disgust with himself for his inability to quit drinking. Consider also his
>relationship difficulties. All of this is difficult to bear for man now
>entering a new level of maturity.
>
>He seemed to be at a real crossroads in his life and changing the direction
>of
>his future was occupying much of his thoughts. (which by the way, many people
>also experience at the age of 27. There are some stastical and astrological
>data that supports this).
Yes.........there are so many factors that come into play here....and that
transition that occurs roughly between the years of 27 and 33 are not the only
periods that people encounter such an 'experience'.
>The reason for Jim's death is a mystery, and will always be, most likely.
>Only
>an autopsy would prove the presence or absence of herion in his system and an
>autopsy is very unlikely to ever be performed. Even if it was, it can never
>be
>proven whether or not Jim's death was brought about accidentally or
>intentionally by himself, or even another (which I believe is unlikely.) If
>there were no traces of herion in his system, then his death would obviously
>be
>due to natural causes, but really, how likely is that?
I don't know....if we're looking at natural or unnatural causes......I say its
likely to be a 50/50 shot.......can't really say either way.
>
>Common sense asserts that many factors should be taken into account and from
>there it's easier to come to conclusions. But our conclusions will never be
>proven, so this is all we have.
Yes this is all we have!
>
>Sorry about the length of this post, but is there really anyway to run down
>this event completely *and* briefly at the same time?
You were so very thorough in touching upon many important points -- the most
important of all: we can only speculate.
Dee
NothingV
>> In fact, many, on both
>>sides of the Pam/Patricia issue think much of it is rubbish.
>
>?? I didn't think his death was a Pam/Patrica issue......better yet, there is
>a
>Pam/Patricia issue???????
dont pretend to be ignorant of this, dee. we all know that butler has a sort of
affection for jim & pams relationship. & that that may easily affect ones
thoughts on this matter. you know how i mean.
nothing
TerriRites
<<I thought cocaine was the greatest drug ever...I was the coolest chick in the
world on cocaine.......the most beautiful, the most interesting and
intelligent.......hahahha......what a joke...>>
Hi Fab!
No, you couldn't have been the coolest, most beautiful, most interesting and
intelligent... because that was ME! ha ha. Yeah, they should nickname coke
"mega-ego". That would throw the cops off while tapping the phones, huh?
<<Oh my God......yes. Forgetting how to breathe.....thinking while you were
stoned that breathing in fact was a voluntary function......like you had to
remember to do it......
Back in those days we used to roll joint after joint.......and get goofy and
laugh.......the quality of pot these days is dramatically different......I
don't like it at all.......paranoia city for me.>>
It really is different. I thought it was me, but it's the drugs... gotta be.
That breathing thing was a real downer, huh??? :)
Terri
fab.......class of '79 stoner
TerriRites
nothing
>>
How true... especially when you have Bulter (the "Pam" Camp) insisting that Pam
never even did the herion that Kennealy insists killed Jim! Seems there is a
Pam/Patricia side in nearly everything related to Jim. I'm not saying that's a
good thing of course... but it's still a *thing* all the same.
Terri
DLyte99720
In article <19981001031244...@ng109.aol.com>, noth...@aol.com
(NothingV) writes:
>?? I didn't think his death was a Pam/Patrica issue......better yet, there is
>>a
>>Pam/Patricia issue???????
>
>dont pretend to be ignorant of this, dee. we all know that butler has a sort
>of
>affection for jim & pams relationship. & that that may easily affect ones
>thoughts on this matter. you know how i mean.
>
>nothing
Well wouldn't that be a Butler issue then?
Dee
DLyte99720
In article <19981001161216...@ng79.aol.com>, terri...@aol.com
(TerriRites) writes:
>How true... especially when you have Bulter (the "Pam" Camp) insisting that
>Pam
>never even did the herion that Kennealy insists killed Jim! Seems there is a
>Pam/Patricia side in nearly everything related to Jim. I'm not saying that's
>a
>good thing of course... but it's still a *thing* all the same.
>
>Terri
>
Ack.....my point was that the Pam/Patricia issue does actually seem like an
issue to me........I don't see any reason for a Pam vs. Patty thing.
Dee
NothingV
>>dont pretend to be ignorant of this, dee. we all know that butler has a sort
>>of
>>affection for jim & pams relationship. & that that may easily affect ones
>>thoughts on this matter. you know how i mean.
>>
>>nothing
>
>Well wouldn't that be a Butler issue then?
>
>
butler made a sort of defense for pam, as i see it. she merely presented the
matter in a light which does not gleam nicely on pkm. it is not a butler issue.
it is all, essentially, about pam & pkm.
nothing
DLyte99720
In article <19981002175056...@ng41.aol.com>, noth...@aol.com
(NothingV) writes:
>butler made a sort of defense for pam, as i see it. she merely presented the
>matter in a light which does not gleam nicely on pkm. it is not a butler
>issue.
>it is all, essentially, about pam & pkm.
>
>nothing
>
Ok.....then *what* is essentiall about Pam and Patricia? Are they fighting for
the right to the first in line concubine?
I was just stating that I personally don't think there is an issue between the
two women, although Patricia seems to think so.
Its seems it more an issue of how 'Doors' fans' portray Patricia and
Pam......not actually an issue between the two......
Dee
Fab521
>No, you couldn't have been the coolest, most beautiful, most interesting and
>intelligent... because that was ME! ha ha. Yeah, they should nickname coke
>"mega-ego". That would throw the cops off while tapping the phones, huh?
>
><<Oh my God......yes. Forgetting how to breathe.....thinking while you were
>stoned that breathing in fact was a voluntary function......like you had to
>remember to do it......
>Back in those days we used to roll joint after joint.......and get goofy and
>laugh.......the quality of pot these days is dramatically different......I
>don't like it at all.......paranoia city for me.>>
>
>It really is different. I thought it was me, but it's the drugs... gotta be.
>That breathing thing was a real downer, huh??? :)
>
>Terri
>
>fab.......class of '79 stoner
>
>
>
>
And then there was the patheticness of the 80's fashion thing......really
tragic....remember the flashdance thing? Cut-out off the shoulder sweatshirt
thing with the white tank underneath......really short skirts and very high
heels.......oh very cool....hahahah.
fab......what a feeling....
NothingV
>Its seems it more an issue of how 'Doors' fans' portray Patricia and
>Pam......not actually an issue between the two......
>
>
i dont think we disagree then, because i dont think its an issue *between* the
2 either. but i do think that matters revolve around & *about* the 2.
nothing
DLyte99720
>i dont think we disagree then, because i dont think its an issue *between*
>the
>2 either. but i do think that matters revolve around & *about* the 2.
>
>nothing
>
I don't think we disagree then either -- so, agreed =)
Dee
TerriRites
(TerriRites) writes:
>How true... especially when you have Bulter (the "Pam" Camp) insisting that
>Pam
>never even did the herion that Kennealy insists killed Jim! Seems there is a
>Pam/Patricia side in nearly everything related to Jim. I'm not saying that's
>a
>good thing of course... but it's still a *thing* all the same.
>
>Terri
Dee writes:
<<Ack.....my point was that the Pam/Patricia issue does actually seem like an
issue to me........I don't see any reason for a Pam vs. Patty thing.>>>
But it is an issue and there doesn't have to be a reason. There are obviously
sides chosen when the debate focuses on Jim's chicks... and the primary players
are Pam and Patricia. People do have strong opinions and make them well known,
for or against either party. I will give you this much, the issue does not seem
to be between Pam and Patricia themselves (really, how can it be? Pam's no
longer living) but it's an issue just the same. There have been far too many
posts on the matter to dismiss it, don't you think?
Terri
TerriRites
<<And then there was the patheticness of the 80's fashion thing......really
tragic....remember the flashdance thing?
>>
Bleckkkk. How can I forget? How about huge shoulder pads and tons of makeup?
And back then we were all talking about what an ugly era the 70s were! ha ha
ha.
Terri... karma chameleon...
Fab521
>Bleckkkk. How can I forget? How about huge shoulder pads and tons of makeup?
>And back then we were all talking about what an ugly era the 70s were! ha ha
>ha.
>
>Terri... karma chameleon...
>
just remember there being a lot of pink......like........fuschia? Hahahahha.
And the hair was just so HUGE.......like, really gigantic hair.......oh, yea
Terri, at that time the 70's were just way to au naturelle for the
mega-fake-o-rama 80's.....far too many earth tones......hahhaha.
fab.......fashion victim
DLyte99720
In article <19981005062321...@ng72.aol.com>, terri...@aol.com
(TerriRites) writes:
>But it is an issue and there doesn't have to be a reason. There are obviously
>sides chosen when the debate focuses on Jim's chicks... and the primary
>players
>are Pam and Patricia. People do have strong opinions and make them well
>known,
>for or against either party. I will give you this much, the issue does not
>seem
>to be between Pam and Patricia themselves (really, how can it be? Pam's no
>longer living) but it's an issue just the same. There have been far too many
>posts on the matter to dismiss it, don't you think?
>
>Terri
>
True enough, but in my mind there I'm not so inclined to take sides here. I
think Pam and Patricia certainly had their places within Jim Morrison's life.
And I won't be the first or the last to say that one woman was more fitting or
perfect to play the role as his numero uno gal..................
Although, with the way things happened...................it certainly seems
that Pam was by his side more often, but that is only in terms of
quantity........I'm not sure about the quality being dealt with here.
Dee
TerriRites
(TerriRites) writes:
>But it is an issue and there doesn't have to be a reason. There are obviously
>sides chosen>>
<<True enough, but in my mind there I'm not so inclined to take sides here. I
think Pam and Patricia certainly had their places within Jim Morrison's life.
And I won't be the first or the last to say that one woman was more fitting or
perfect to play the role as his numero uno gal..................>>
I can appreciate that. Never the less, sides are chosen by many. It might not
make sense but it offers good debate. There are certainly valid arguments on
either side.
<<Although, with the way things happened...................it certainly seems
that Pam was by his side more often, but that is only in terms of
quantity........I'm not sure about the quality being dealt with here.>>
Right. Appearances are a major factor when looking at Pam's side of things. A
wedding ceremony and letters from Jim play a major role in PKM's side of the
matter. It's not easy, yet, that why it's fun to discuss.
Terri
Fab521
>Right. Appearances are a major factor when looking at Pam's side of things. A
>wedding ceremony and letters from Jim play a major role in PKM's side of the
>matter. It's not easy, yet, that why it's fun to discuss.
>
>Terri
>
she's not alive to disagree.
Let me pose a ridiculously hypothetical question to you Terri....
Do you think that Patricia would have the balls to make the claims that she
does if either Pam or Jim were alive?
I don't.
No way.
Think about it.
fab
Miz Scarlett
>
>(TerriRites) writes:
>
>>But it is an issue and there doesn't have to be a reason. There are obviously
>>sides chosen>>
>
><<True enough, but in my mind there I'm not so inclined to take sides here. I
>think Pam and Patricia certainly had their places within Jim Morrison's life.
>And I won't be the first or the last to say that one woman was more fitting or
>perfect to play the role as his numero uno gal..................>>
>
>I can appreciate that. Never the less, sides are chosen by many. It might not
>make sense but it offers good debate. There are certainly valid arguments on
>either side.
>
><<Although, with the way things happened...................it certainly seems
>that Pam was by his side more often, but that is only in terms of
>quantity........I'm not sure about the quality being dealt with here.>>
>wedding ceremony and letters from Jim play a major role in PKM's side of the
>matter.
Since Jim told several people about the ceremony (including one who often
appears here in clerical garb, shall we say ;-) and in each case
expressed his *lack* of seriousness...well, Patricia would have been much
better advised to stick to what she told Ms. Balfour back in 1986.
And the letters from Jim....some are, but written in 1970. The
others...let's just say they probably written by someone who thinks very,
very, very highly of Patricia Kennealy. But is/was that person Jim
Morrison?
The plot thickens....
TerriRites
<<Yea, the shoulderpads.....it was right before the flashdance thing......and I
just remember there being a lot of pink......like........fuschia? Hahahahha.>>
Oh God, yes. Fuschia and Black together everywhere. Oh yeah and we got some
cute home fashions as well, black laquer everywhere :)
<<And the hair was just so HUGE.......like, really gigantic hair.......oh,
yea>>
Yep, I had that huge hair too. In my wedding picture you can't even see my
veil!
<<Terri, at that time the 70's were just way to au naturelle for the
mega-fake-o-rama 80's.....far too many earth tones......hahhaha.>>
HA HA. Oh yeah. Harvest golds and greens... especially on kitchen appliances :)
The 70s and the 80s... total opposite "fashion" decades, huh? Yikes.
Terri
DLyte99720
In article <19981006174657...@ng78.aol.com>, terri...@aol.com
(TerriRites) writes:
>I can appreciate that. Never the less, sides are chosen by many. It might not
>make sense but it offers good debate. There are certainly valid arguments on
>either side.
Maybe.
>
><<Although, with the way things happened...................it certainly seems
>that Pam was by his side more often, but that is only in terms of
>quantity........I'm not sure about the quality being dealt with here.>>
>
>Right. Appearances are a major factor when looking at Pam's side of things. A
>wedding ceremony and letters from Jim play a major role in PKM's side of the
>matter. It's not easy, yet, that why it's fun to discuss.
>
>Terri
>
>
Yes and Patricia also has a great volume of words and very little action of
Jims to back that up with................again quantity not quality.........
It's not easy.......and yes, that is why its fun!
Dee
TerriRites
<<Do you think that Patricia would have the balls to make the claims that she
does if either Pam or Jim were alive?
I don't.
No way.
Think about it.
fab>>
Yes Fab, I do. She had *no* idea what Jim or Pam might have told others about
her relationship with Jim, what evidence of or about the relationship that Jim
left behind in Paris. What Jim's family may have known... what the other Doors
may have known, what Pam's parents may have known, etc. While she may not have
come under attack as a liar by Pam or Jim because they are no longer living, if
she had been lying, she had *no way* to know who out there might have been
privy to the "truth". And if someone could prove her to be a liar, believe me,
it would have happened by now. Therefore, I don't think she'd make false
statements when evidence by sources unknown to her could have discredited her
and made her look like an idiot!
Keep in mind that absolutely no one has been able to disprove her. All anyone
could ever do was speculate on the possibilities of her story. There is no way
she could have known that would be the case. If Jim and Pam were alive, I do
believe she would have said the same thing because Jim and Pam certainly have
many representatives that aren't discrediting her.
And if it were only Pam and Patricia that had survived, would you be
immediately inclined to believe whatever Pam said?
Terri
TerriRites
<<Since Jim told several people about the ceremony (including one who often
appears here in clerical garb, shall we say ;-) and in each case
expressed his *lack* of seriousness...well, Patricia would have been much
better advised to stick to what she told Ms. Balfour back in 1986.>>
Miz Scarlett, I'm hesitant to believe everything Balfour wrote just becase she
claims Patricia said it. She could have written it, but does that necessarily
make it so?
Even still, even if Jim didn't take the ceremony all that serious, so what? It
took about 5 years for my husband to take *his* marriage vows seriously. And ye
gads... the things he'd tell his friends. My husband told his buddies that I
roped him into marriage. I pressured him, gave him ultimateums. He told them he
could always take off if he wanted to. yada, yada. Of course none of this is
true, never was, but as a *male* super-stud, he felt he had save face to all
his single friends who all poo-pooed marriage.
Eight years later, they are all married too, and my husband and I are the
happiest couple that at least *I* know. So, Miz Scarlett, how seriously Jim
told others he took the cermony isn't always that relevant.
<<And the letters from Jim....some are, but written in 1970. The
others...let's just say they probably written by someone who thinks very,
very, very highly of Patricia Kennealy. But is/was that person Jim
Morrison? >>>
Sounds like you know something we don't, and I'm sure it's from a credible
source too. If not, this conjecture is just silly. Have you seen the letters in
question? Who is it that told you they may be fakes? Do you actually believe
that there aren't dedicated fans that will be eager to have them authenticized
by a professional? Do you actually believe that Patricia doesn't figure as
much? Curious.
Terri
TerriRites
>I can appreciate that. Never the less, sides are chosen by many. It might not
>make sense but it offers good debate. There are certainly valid arguments on
>either side.
<<Maybe.>>
::: again Dee stands firm! Don't waver, Dee. Not an inch::: :)
>
><<Although, with the way things happened...................it certainly seems
>that Pam was by his side more often, but that is only in terms of
>quantity........I'm not sure about the quality being dealt with here.>>
>
>Right. Appearances are a major factor when looking at Pam's side of things. A
>wedding ceremony and letters from Jim play a major role in PKM's side of the
>matter. It's not easy, yet, that why it's fun to discuss.
>
>Terri
>
>
<<Yes and Patricia also has a great volume of words and very little action of
Jims to back that up with................again quantity not quality.........>>
What would she need to provide to gain some creedence? She's got the letters,
Jim's *own* words... but, oh, those can be fakes, or Jim didn't mean it, and
blah, blah blah. You guys wouldn't cut her any slack if he popped out of the
grave and came to you all and told you personally. That would probably be one
of Patricia's "spells" or something, right?
Terri
Miz Scarlett
>
>>I can appreciate that. Never the less, sides are chosen by many. It might not
>>make sense but it offers good debate. There are certainly valid arguments on
>>either side.
>
><<Maybe.>>
>
>::: again Dee stands firm! Don't waver, Dee. Not an inch::: :)
>
>>
>><<Although, with the way things happened...................it certainly seems
>>that Pam was by his side more often, but that is only in terms of
>>quantity........I'm not sure about the quality being dealt with here.>>
>>
>>Right. Appearances are a major factor when looking at Pam's side of things. A
>>wedding ceremony and letters from Jim play a major role in PKM's side of the
>>matter. It's not easy, yet, that why it's fun to discuss.
>>
>>Terri
>What would she need to provide to gain some creedence?
>She's got the letters,
>Jim's *own* words... but, oh, those can be fakes, or Jim didn't mean it, and
>blah, blah blah. You guys wouldn't cut her any slack if he popped out of the
>grave and came to you all and told you personally.
Terri, I'm beginning to think if he "popped out of the grave" and told
*you* personally she was a liar, you'd proceed to try to convince him
otherwise ;-)
Miz Scarlett
>And if someone could prove her to be a liar, believe me,
>it would have happened by now.
What, you want signed affidavits?
Seriously, I think part of the reason she's got away with so much for so
long is that people who could expose at least some of her lies simply
haven't been paying attention, comparing notes, etc.
But that's changing...;-)
Miz Scarlett
Newsgroups: alt.music.the-doors
Subject: Re: jim's death
Date: 7 Oct 1998 08:20:30 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Message-ID: <19981007042030...@ng98.aol.com>
References: <19981007013436...@ngol07.aol.com>
>I can appreciate that. Never the less, sides are chosen by many. It might not
>make sense but it offers good debate. There are certainly valid arguments on
>either side.
<<Maybe.>>
::: again Dee stands firm! Don't waver, Dee. Not an inch::: :)
>
><<Although, with the way things happened...................it certainly seems
>that Pam was by his side more often, but that is only in terms of
>quantity........I'm not sure about the quality being dealt with here.>>
>
>Right. Appearances are a major factor when looking at Pam's side of things. A
>wedding ceremony and letters from Jim play a major role in PKM's side of the
>matter. It's not easy, yet, that why it's fun to discuss.
>
>Terri
>
>
<<Yes and Patricia also has a great volume of words and very little action of
Jims to back that up with................again quantity not quality.........>>
What would she need to provide to gain some creedence? She's got the letters,
Jim's *own* words... but, oh, those can be fakes, or Jim didn't mean it, and
blah, blah blah. You guys wouldn't cut her any slack if he popped out of the
DLyte99720
>>I can appreciate that. Never the less, sides are chosen by many. It might
>not
>>make sense but it offers good debate. There are certainly valid arguments on
>>either side.
>
><<Maybe.>>
>
>::: again Dee stands firm! Don't waver, Dee. Not an inch::: :)
Hey.....have I budged from my inquisitive stance? Of course not............;)
>>
><<Yes and Patricia also has a great volume of words and very little action of
>Jims to back that up with................again quantity not
>quality.........>>
>
>What would she need to provide to gain some creedence? She's got the letters,
>Jim's *own* words... but, oh, those can be fakes, or Jim didn't mean it, and
>blah, blah blah. You guys wouldn't cut her any slack if he popped out of the
>grave and came to you all and told you personally. That would probably be
>one
>of Patricia's "spells" or something, right?
No....actually that'd do it!
Anyways......all of those *words* certainly prove something -- Jim gave her
gifts in the form of his words to show he cared......
Now I'm askin' ya -- if he talked the talk, did he walk the walk?
Dee
DLyte99720
>Terri, I'm beginning to think if he "popped out of the grave" and told
>*you* personally she was a liar, you'd proceed to try to convince him
>otherwise ;-)
Wonderful point Mz. Scarlett............hmm....Seems Terri's point does work
both ways............
And it'd certainly work for me! Of course.......I'd make him take me up on my
grilled cheese and funky cider offer were his dead scraggly ass ever to appear
at my door to reveal the good word.
Dee
DLyte99720
In article <19981007025901...@ng99.aol.com>, terri...@aol.com
(TerriRites) writes:
>
>And if it were only Pam and Patricia that had survived, would you be
>immediately inclined to believe whatever Pam said?
>
>Terri
>
Well, from what I have heard of Pam, it seems she was very level-headed about
things................even Patricia's portrayal of this woman fits the bill.
Dee
DLyte99720
In article <19981007031205...@ng99.aol.com>, terri...@aol.com
(TerriRites) writes:
>Miz Scarlett, I'm hesitant to believe everything Balfour wrote just becase
>she
>claims Patricia said it. She could have written it, but does that necessarily
>make it so?
No terr..........Balfour didn't just write it.........she quoted Patricia
saying that herself.............she didn't just speculate here.
>
>Even still, even if Jim didn't take the ceremony all that serious, so what?
What???????????????????????? so what? heehehehahahahahah yeah, ok. =)
>
><<And the letters from Jim....some are, but written in 1970. The
>others...let's just say they probably written by someone who thinks very,
>very, very highly of Patricia Kennealy. But is/was that person Jim
>Morrison? >>>
>
>Sounds like you know something we don't, and I'm sure it's from a credible
>source too. If not, this conjecture is just silly. Have you seen the letters
>in
>question? Who is it that told you they may be fakes? Do you actually believe
>that there aren't dedicated fans that will be eager to have them
>authenticized
>by a professional? Do you actually believe that Patricia doesn't figure as
>much? Curious.
>
>Terri
>
>
hmmmmm.......Dee is *real* curious too....................
Fab521
>Yes Fab, I do. She had *no* idea what Jim or Pam might have told others about
>her relationship with Jim, what evidence of or about the relationship that
>Jim
>left behind in Paris. What Jim's family may have known... what the other Doors
may have known, what Pam's parents may have known, etc.
Hey, Terri......
What if....What if.....
Patricia's *relationship* with Jim was in fact over (as far as Jim was
concerned) well before Jim even left for Paris?
What if Patricia was not welcome with any of these people?
What if they all think she's crazy as a loon and want nothing to do with her?
What if......
>While she may not have
>come under attack as a liar by Pam or Jim because they are no longer living,
>if
>she had been lying, she had *no way* to know who out there might have been
>privy to the "truth".
Here you are assuming that Patricia's *spin* is the truth.....
I don't believe it.
>And if someone could prove her to be a liar, believe me,
>it would have happened by now.
Really?
How do you know this is true?
This is a broad speculation.
>Therefore, I don't think she'd make false
>statements when evidence by sources unknown to her could have discredited her
>and made her look like an idiot!
I think Patty's been very careful to build her lies.......and she has had quite
a bit of time to do it. She tells one lie 10 years ago......then repeats it as
fact today to support yet another lie.....very tricky that Patricia, with a
lot of patience and persistance too......
>Keep in mind that absolutely no one has been able to disprove her.
Sure they have.....but Patricia is the artful dodger....
She turns it around on them, calls them names, and succeeds to make them so
angry that they get fed up and retreat, or they bite the bait and end up
looking like hystrionic envious fools. (which BTW Patricia never neglects to
point out)
That seems to be what's happened so far........but things could be
changing..........the truth aint gonna go away.
>And if it were only Pam and Patricia that had survived, would you be
>immediately inclined to believe whatever Pam said?
Immediately inclined? Nope.
fab
Miz Scarlett
>
>>Even still, even if Jim didn't take the ceremony all that serious, so what?
>
>
>What???????????????????????? so what? heehehehahahahahah yeah, ok. =)
You said it, kid....
>><<And the letters from Jim....some are, but written in 1970. The
>>others...let's just say they probably written by someone who thinks very,
>>very, very highly of Patricia Kennealy. But is/was that person Jim
>>Morrison? >>>
>>Sounds like you know something we don't,
I expect I know quite a bit you don't.
>>and I'm sure it's from a credible
>>source too.
Several credible sources, actually.
>>If not, this conjecture is just silly. Have you seen the letters
>>question? Who is it that told you they may be fakes? Do you actually believe
>>that there aren't dedicated fans that will be eager to have them
>>authenticized
>>by a professional?
>>Do you actually believe that Patricia doesn't figure as
>>much?
I'm sure she does. I'm sure she also knows that the only way she could be
forced to submit them to documents experts would be if they were made
part of a court case...and "dedicated fans" don't have standing to sue.
I'm sure she'd be happy to submit them to "trained graphologists" of her
own selection..;-)
Fab521
>Terri, I'm beginning to think if he "popped out of the grave" and told
>*you* personally she was a liar, you'd proceed to try to convince him
>otherwise ;-)
>
Naw, Scarlett.......
I don't think so.
I think Terri is as interested in the truth as the rest of us.
fab
Fab521
>Oh God, yes. Fuschia and Black together everywhere.
And a brief polka-dot (oh-my-god) thing with these colors......oh very very
bad.....
>Oh yeah and we got some
>cute home fashions as well, black laquer everywhere :)
Yea......shiny was the keyword.....mirrors...just a lot of reflection going
on.....
>Yep, I had that huge hair too. In my wedding picture you can't even see my
>veil!
>
LOL, you and every other bride of this time......(I was responsible for a good
many of these hair tragedies......)
>HA HA. Oh yeah. Harvest golds and greens... especially on kitchen appliances
>:)
Harvest gold, avacado......what was that really cool burnt orange color called?
fab......currently looking at my coppertone refrigerator.......
TerriRites
<<Anyways......all of those *words* certainly prove something -- Jim gave her
gifts in the form of his words to show he cared......
Now I'm askin' ya -- if he talked the talk, did he walk the walk?>>
I think he did, Dee. I don't see any reason why he would have lied to her. She
wasn't *stalking* him when he went to Paris... it's not like he needed to
pacify her. She would have never been able to find him again... unless he
*wanted* her to. Again, why would he lie?
He certainly didn't make this easy for us and he's probably laughing
hysterically at us.
Terri
TerriRites
terri...@aol.com (TerriRites) wrote:
>And if someone could prove her to be a liar, believe me,
>it would have happened by now.
<<What, you want signed affidavits? >>
Of course not. But I've yet to hear a good argument disclosing her as a liar.
<<Seriously, I think part of the reason she's got away with so much for so
long is that people who could expose at least some of her lies simply
haven't been paying attention, comparing notes, etc.
But that's changing...;-)>>
Really? What's going on? When will we see some of this?
Terri
TerriRites
Miz Scarlet wries:
<<Terri, I'm beginning to think if he "popped out of the grave" and told
*you* personally she was a liar, you'd proceed to try to convince him
otherwise ;-) >>
Now you just stop that stinkin' thinkin' Mz Scarlett. :)
Terri
TerriRites
<<Naw, Scarlett.......
I don't think so.
I think Terri is as interested in the truth as the rest of us.
fab >>
Thanks Fab... yes I am. I don't know anything for sure and I am open for
anything. I just keep waiting for something that will persuade me the other
way.
Terri
DLyte99720
><<Anyways......all of those *words* certainly prove something -- Jim gave her
>gifts in the form of his words to show he cared......
>
>Now I'm askin' ya -- if he talked the talk, did he walk the walk?>>
>
>I think he did, Dee. I don't see any reason why he would have lied to her.
>She
>wasn't *stalking* him when he went to Paris... it's not like he needed to
>pacify her. She would have never been able to find him again... unless he
>*wanted* her to. Again, why would he lie?
>
I wasn't implying that Jim was *lying*......I just said he talked the talk, now
do you think he walked the walk????
Someone can say they love someone, and then their actions display something
different...........doesn't mean they lied.......their words and their actions
just aren't consistent or compatable....................
so, I'm not asking if you think he lied, I'm asking if you think he walked the
walk......do you?
Dee
DLyte99720
Aw.....but Terr......you brought up this "poppin' out of graves"
example..............
stinkin' thinkin' indeed!
*S*
Dee
Fab521
>Thanks Fab... yes I am. I don't know anything for sure and I am open for
>anything. I just keep waiting for something that will persuade me the other
>way.
>
>Terri
>
>
The possibilities are endless.
The truth is here.
fab
Fab521
>I expect I know quite a bit you don't.
>
>
Sounds like you do Scarlett.
>I'm sure she does. I'm sure she also knows that the only way she could be
>forced to submit them to documents experts would be if they were made
>part of a court case...and "dedicated fans" don't have standing to sue.
Is this true, Scarlett?
How is this so?
>I'm sure she'd be happy to submit them to "trained graphologists" of her
>own selection..;-)
You don't really think that Patricia has thought this one out till the end do
you?
All the details in place?
Ahhhh. I see.
fab
Miz Scarlett
>
>>Terri, I'm beginning to think if he "popped out of the grave" and told
>>*you* personally she was a liar, you'd proceed to try to convince him
>>otherwise ;-)
>>
>
>I don't think so.
>I think Terri is as interested in the truth as the rest of us.
>
>fab
Yes, I think she is too. And I think I know why she's so determined to
believe Patricia. Just had the handfasting portion of Strange Days read
to me, as well as a passage towards the end that was so moving, so
elegaic, that *I* was in tears...
She's a talented writer, Patricia is; I'd forgotten just how talented.
It's a sorry thing, to see that kind of talent in the service of a spirit
so sick and so vengeful.