Edit.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-20 11:44 by Baboon Bro.

More vintage pics with Brian, Anita etc in this thread [www.iorr.org]

... Keylock wasn't working for the Stones in 1977.
i agree with Silver Dagger that it's way more likely to be Keith's defence counsel -
Harlem Shuffler, can you clarify or correct that guess, please and thank you?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-21 09:18 by with sssoul.

Can't find any pix of Tom in the late 70s but here's one of him in the 90s.



Here's one of him in the late 60s.

I'm gettin' most uncertain again and had among other things
mixed up one of the the google image-serach-hits
with Michael Caine (maybe not too weird since both
the person on the first pics
and Keylock is very Caine-like); so I have edited above.
I will return to the subject later.

Not that I doubt your data on Keylock having quit working for Stones in 1977,
with sssoul, but what are your sources on this?

[www.timesonline.co.uk]

"Soon after Jones’s death, Keylock left the Stones’ employment to start his own transport company."

Speaking of trials, court cases etc... I just took these lovely photos down from one of my walls (to make room for more!) and just couldn't resist posting them.
I believe this could be from a photo session they did just after the "Redlands bust trial". They're so funny and in a very intelligent way, they make their comments about the bust at Redlands (might have been a set up, yes!) and the British judicial system.
If someone could provide more info about these photos, I'd be very happy and grateful! I bought them at a convention in London and noticed I'd lost the fact sheets that came with them.



Photo: Anthony Stern


Photo: Anthony Stern

Added photographer's name. FINALLY!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-16 18:59 by Addicted.

Addicted ....shots are from We Love You video shoot



ROCKMAN

>> We Love You video shoot <<

yep! july 30th-31st 1967

Thanks Rockman, thanks with sssoul.
My photos don't seem like they're clips from a video (or a 35 mm film camera - this was from the pre-video time, I presume?), but perhaps they had a stills photographer on the set? Do you happen to know who that might have been? I always like knowing the name of the photographer - if I've framed the photos, anyway...

It's not crucial - I still love these photos! So different and full of humour.

In reply to the questions that my humble thread has raised:

Sohoe, I can only assume the reason Les Perrin was there was that he was working for the Stones at the time. I hope I haven't misidentified Les. If I have, I owe you and everyone else who read my little "article" an apology. At the time I thought it might have been Keith's father, not knowing what he looked like then, but someone in the gallery confidently told me that it was Les Perrin.

Edith Grove, Sohoe and Rockman, I will tell my other story soon but I want this thread to run its natural course.

Baboon Bro, "That sidewhisker dude" is definitely not Les Perrin. The man I think is Perrin is wearing a hat on the left of with sssoul's photo. I remember thinking at the time that he didn't look too well.

Boogie69,thanks for asking how Keith looked as I should have mentioned it before. He looked like a black & white photo because he was wearing a black velvet suit and because his face was light grey. I don't mean he was merely pale. He was "elegantly wasted" to use Nick Kent's description (prior to the trial) in the New Musical Express. His hair was very dark. It didn't look dyed but his hair at the back had a patch of white about the size of a small postage stamp. The thing is it suited Keith so much that he looked great. That last remark won't make much sense to many people other than IORRians, I guess.

That is definitely not Havers in any pic, with sssoul.There was a picture of him going to court with Keith in the book with words and music that Rolling Stone brought out in the '70s. He might not have been knighted at that time, come to think of it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-02-07 15:17 by Harlem Shuffler.

New Musical Express Thursday January 15, 1977

Keef In Court On Monday morning a gold Rolls Royce drew up outside Aylesbury Crown Court and Keith Richard stepped out to face a two count indictment alleging possession of LSD and cocaine.

Keith was white faced and sombre as he entered the small courtroom, dressed in a plain black velvet suit, a white silk shirt and scarf, and stack-heeled boots. Charges were read out and both times Keith answered quietly, "Not Guilty".

The prosecution described how just before 4am on May 19, 1976, the police received an emergency call to investigate an accident on the south bound section of the M1 motorway near Newport Pagnell. Richard's seriously damaged Bentley had ran off the motorway and into a field, ploughing through a hedge and fence.

By the car were five people: Keith Richard, his son Marlon, aged seven, an American called Mr. Sessler and two unidentified girls.

Taken to a police interview room, Richard was searched. In an inside jacket pocket, it was alleged, was found a folded piece of paper, and inside that another piece of paper. Police believed the stain on the second piece of paper to be LSD and arrested Richard on a charge of possessing a controlled drug.

Keith was then taken to the Newport Pagnell police station, while officers searched his car and found a silver chain, on which were attached several objects, including a vinaigrette (a scent or smelling salt holder dated 1870 and worth £150), a miniature silver flick knife, a hollow silver tube, and a car key.

When Keith was shown the chain, he denied it was his, the court was told.

Keith, it was said, informed police that many members of the Stones and their entourage used the car, that the silver chain could belong to anyone. Of the jacket in which the stained paper was discovered he said, "We all wear each other's stage clothes. I don't know what it is."

The court heard that forensic tests showed the silver tube on the chain to contain traces (130 milligrams) of an off white powder, including 39 milligrams of pure cocaine.

The jury were shown two photographs from the Stones Leicester concert of May 15, 1976, in which, it was alleged, the chain that Keith was wearing was the same as the one found in his car.

For the defence, Sir Peter Rawlinson, questioned the right of the police to search a man involved in a car accident for drugs, when he was, in the opinion of the police themselves, under the influence of neither drink nor drugs.

In evidence, Pc Sibbet said his suspicions were first aroused
when he found some pills in Keith's bag. "However," Sibbet said, "the pills were later found to be salt tablets, but on the strength of that we searched him."

Det. Sgt. Bull of Thames Valley Drug Squad described how hollow tubes like the one on the chain are "used to sniff cocaine and amphetamines." He also said LSD on paper could be swallowed or sucked.

A forensic scientist told the court that there was enough LSD on the paper for one dose, while the antiques officer of the Thames Valley police was said to have measured the distances between the objects on the chain in the car and the objects on the chain in the Leicester concert photographs.

After a recess, the defence told the jury that they should have no preconceived ideas of what a rock star is like and should also bear in mind that fans shower bands with gifts before, during and after a gig.

Mick Jagger was sat in the public gallery as Keith took the witness stand and, when asked by the defence about playing lead guitar, replied, "It means I make a lot of noise."

Richard then described how fans always throw gifts at the band - "autograph books, jewellery and food." He maintained the chain in the photos was different from the one in the car. "I'd never seen it before the police showed it to me . . ." He said the same thing of the stained paper.

The prosecution voiced its doubts concerning Richard's assertion that the Stones have a number of jackets the same size "made up for all the group before a tour."

And that was the conclusion of both Keith's stay in the witness box and day one of the trial. As NME went to press, the case was continuing. Tony Parsons

New Musical Express Thursday January 22, 1977

Getting Off In Aylesbury ... ... depends on what you're trying to get off on. KEITH RICHARD got off on the acid, but failed to get off on the cocaine. For all of day two, just like the other two days, Keef sat with his right hand clamped down on top of his left as Stones transport manager Alan Dunn described the "organised chaos" of a tour and how there was always a "fair selection of chains, pendants and costume jewelry around for the band to wear" in reply to Bruce Laughland's (prosecuting) assertion that the silver cocaine chain found in Keith's wasted Bentley was the same as the one in a photograph of Keef taken four days before at another Stones gig in Leicester.

A big turning point in the case was when Dunn admitted that the debris building up on the floor of the car must have at least some superficial cleaning otherwise it would be like cruising around in a luxurious pig-sty. Keef had said that the chain could easily have been lying around amongst everything else as the car was never cleaned whilst on tour. The plot thickens!

The prosecution summed up as the word spread like a dose of the clap that Mick Jagger was sitting in the public gallery and kids started bunking off school and ruffling up their hair just like Keef instead of doing their homework.

"It would be idle for me to pretend that this case is not one that arouses a great deal of public interest," the prosecution said, "But we are all equal before the law." He then gave EIGHT reasons why he thought he had proven that Keef was the owner of the coke chain. It was all a bit like a new Waddington's board game.

Then the crowd went crazy as Sir Peter Rawlinson hit the stage for the defence.

"We are not dealing with Lord Olivier or Rex Harrison here," he pointed out (perhaps with reference to the fact that Keef had not been wearing underpants on the Night of The Bust) "who comes off stage and puts on a Saville Row suit," with reference to the Stones wearing each other's stage clothes.

Next up was the judge, Lawrence Verney, directing the jury in all the subtle little details of the law. However, even though it was only three-fifteen in the afternoon the judge told us we could all sling our collective hooks for the day. Rumour had it that he likes to get home early for his tea ....

The next day, The Final Day, can only be likened to Cup Final Fever. Oop fer der bust, and so on.

By this time the big forbidding looking front gates of Aylesbury Crown Court were locked up to keep the maddening crowd at bay and if it hadn't been for my Jimmy Olsen Press Card, then even I would have been left on the cold concrete amongst the uneaten popcorn and ragged rosettes ....

The judge summed up, wondering aloud if "normal police procedures had been followed" when Keef had been strip-searched after salt-tablets had been found in his bag. Who breaks a butterfly on a wheel and blame it on the Stones .... the gentlemen of the papers that your parents read sniggered when reference was made to Keef's musical burden in the Rolling Stones.

When the jury had departed to make their decision everyone milled around around aimlessly, not wanting to hang around because they could be out for hours but at the same time not wanting to miss The End.

.... gotta run - word's just come through that the jury have reached their decision and it's gonna be announced in a few minutes time.

Keith Richard looks like the definition of rock 'n' roll even when he stands facing the judge with a cop by his side looking scared shitless.

The kids in the gallery gasp, that's just what it was - a communal release of relief - and then there's DEAD SILENCE as he's found guilty of possessing coke.

Keef nods and nods in terrified gratitude mixed with abject horror as Judge Verney tells him that if it happens again there will be more than a thousand pounds fine - next time it will be the nick.

Then Keef, after saying "Thank you" to the jury of nine men and three women, walks from the court with a broad grin on that death-white visage ... a free man.

And I am left thinking that three-day trials could well replace festivals in the rock-masochism league. Tony Parsons


[world-of-keith-richards.piczo.com]


"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-21 13:21 by Deltics.

Keef once again slithers through the long arms of the law...

Great We Love You pictures!

Quote
Harlem Shuffler
In reply to the questions that my humble thread has raised:

-----

Baboon Bro, "That sidewhisker dude" is definitely not Les Perrin. The man I think is Perrin is wearing a hat on the left of with sssoul's photo. I remember thinking at the time that he didn't look too well.

----

Which I backed off from a long time ago. My brain was squirmin like a toad.

Thank you,Deltics for the piece from the NME which correctly states that Sir Peter Rawlinson was defending, not Michael Havers as I said. Havers defended Mick and Keith in 1967 - I think!
Apart from the doubt cast on Les Perrin's appearance and getting the above wrong, my story is totally accurate!
Seriously, I apologise for the errors over the names but I assure you that my personal experience has been told honestly.

thanks for that article, Deltics!

Mick Jagger and Keith Richards together July 1977 after Keith Richards' drug trial at Aylesbury Crown Court where he was fined $1000 for possession of cocaine. Hand-titled, hand-numbered fine art limited edition giclee created from the master negative of MirrorPix, the photo archive of the London Daily Mirror. Framed size 20" x 16". Raw size 14" x 10".
©MirrorPix
[www.signedrock.com]


"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

Here's a pic of Tom K. I still think he looks very much alike the sidewhiskerdude.

right: in the late 60s Tom Keylock looked quite similar to how the man at Aylesbury looked in 1977,
but that doesn't mean it's him.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-22 15:02 by with sssoul.

Quote
Deltics

Mick Jagger and Keith Richards together July 1977 after Keith Richards' drug trial at Aylesbury Crown Court where he was fined $1000 for possession of cocaine. Hand-titled, hand-numbered fine art limited edition giclee created from the master negative of MirrorPix, the photo archive of the London Daily Mirror. Framed size 20" x 16". Raw size 14" x 10".
©MirrorPix
[www.signedrock.com]

Keith didn't show up for the trial date set in july 77. I have seen this pic dated as january 12 1977.

Quote
Harlem Shuffler
Thank you,Deltics for the piece from the NME which correctly states that Sir Peter Rawlinson was defending, not Michael Havers as I said. Havers defended Mick and Keith in 1967 - I think!
Apart from the doubt cast on Les Perrin's appearance and getting the above wrong, my story is totally accurate!
Seriously, I apologise for the errors over the names but I assure you that my personal experience has been told honestly.

Definitely Michael Havers for the defence in 1967. When the BBC did a play about the Redlands bust & trial, Havers was played by his son, actor Nigel Havers.

>> I have seen this pic dated as january 12 1977. <<

yikes - of course that's january 1977, not july 1977

Quote
Deltics
New Musical Express Thursday January 15, 1977


The court heard that forensic tests showed the silver tube on the chain to contain traces (130 milligrams) of an off white powder, including 39 milligrams of pure cocaine.

So Sessler even cheated his employer -

Mathijs

From Rolling Stone:


From NME:
:

Thank you to everyone for their contributions to the thread.
Getting back to the first line of my original post, was anyone else on this site present at Aylesbury?
It doesn't sound like it (so far). I think we must conclude that I am Keith's No. 1 fan - just kidding!

Quote
Addicted
Thanks Rockman, thanks with sssoul.
My photos don't seem like they're clips from a video (or a 35 mm film camera - this was from the pre-video time, I presume?), but perhaps they had a stills photographer on the set? Do you happen to know who that might have been? I always like knowing the name of the photographer - if I've framed the photos, anyway...

It's not crucial - I still love these photos! So different and full of humour.

Accidentally found the answer to my own question!
The stills photos on the set of the "We Love You"-film - NOT video - was Anthony Stern! Only took me about 4 months to find out. They're on the wall, and looking really well together with my Phillip Townsend collection.

I realise this thread was started some time ago but I have only just come upon it.

Les Perrin was still working for the Stones in 1977. He stopped working for them in 1978 shortly before his death.

He was not the man in sidewhiskers in the picture.

He was present at most of the trials including the Toronto one and stodd bail on at least one occasion.

I know all this as this was my Dad. I spent 11 years of my life with the Stones being a major part of the picture. It was an interesting childhood!!!!

Just looked again at ssoul's picture and I think that was my father (Les Perrin) right in the corner. I had forgotten quite how ill he was at that point.

After 11 years of working for him, his loyalty was never in question. Shame it wasn't necessarily returned in some quarters!!!!!!

Welcome on board, stephperrin
And thanks for answering my old question re Les

>> Welcome on board, stephperrin <<

make that a double! interesting childhood indeed