I'm just curious.....of all the times in their long history that the Stones have had trouble with the law or have been arrested, either collectively or individually, have any of those incidents ever involved Charlie? Is he the only perceived "squeaky clean" member of the band? I realize he had some minor drug issues in the 80's, I think, but did that ever amount to anything so far as "getting into trouble"?

Wow, the things I think of while passing time waiting for the next big Stones album announcement.....lol!

Ride like the wind at double speed.....

Not sure if Charlie was in trouble, I think the whole band sort of got in trouble for taking a piss in public in the early days. Also I wouldn't call Charlie's drug problem small in the 80's. He said he almost lost his family and really almost fell of the edge but he just kept it quiet so nobody knew about it till later. He was almost in tears about this on 60 Minutes a few years back.

Thanks Hound Dog! This is good to know.

Ride like the wind at double speed.....

I recall that interview as well. Hard to think of Charlie as a junkie but that's what he was at the time. Far from squeaky clean myself I've often wondered how someone decides to do heroin the first time. I've tried most things over the years and in my youth but at no time did I even consider sticking a needle in my arm knowing full well it's going to change your life forever and there's a good chance you'll die from it. The withdrawal process looks particularly appealing.

What drugs did Charlie get into in the 80s? I've read a few books but nothing detailed on that period.

H

And meth.

kyle m

Have you ever lent somebody $20 and never seen them again? It was probably worth it.

Nothing was ever written about this in the 80's. The first I knew of Charlie's addictions was his interview on 60 Minutes back in 94. After I saw that, I often wondered if Mick and Keith kind of "hyped" up their feuding back in the 80's just to cover for Charlie, with Mick claiming he didn't want to tour for Dirty Work, when it would have been obvious that Charlie was in no shape to tour regardless?

"with Mick claiming he didn't want to tour for Dirty Work, when it would have been obvious that Charlie was in no shape to tour regardless?"

Well, I recall Mick actually saying at the time (or little afterwards, prior Steel Wheels?) that some members of the band were not in shape to tour. I remember wondering who did he mean by that. Keith was of course in my mind, never Charlie.

But as whole, the whole Charlie problem was handled very discretely - the press (and therery by, we fans) did not know anything about it at the time.

- Doxa

And one more thing - Charlie was in trouble in 85-86, right? thinking about the press: at least British press was really hungry for the news like that; f.e. there was a lot of discussion of Boy George's problems with heroin at the time... I am sure they would have nailed Charlie if they would have known...you know: ROLLING STONE once again in troubles with DRUGS... It would have been a disaster.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-07-08 10:09 by Doxa.

Yes, definitely, the press could have certainly pounced on such a story had the band not kept it all so discreet. I'm glad Charlie's name wasn't dragged through the mud at the time because he certainly deserves better than that. He's truly a class act, and obviously very well respected.

Thanks again for the feedback, everyone.

DGA35 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nothing was ever written about this in the 80's.
> The first I knew of Charlie's addictions was his
> interview on 60 Minutes back in 94. After I saw
> that, I often wondered if Mick and Keith kind of
> "hyped" up their feuding back in the 80's just to
> cover for Charlie, with Mick claiming he didn't
> want to tour for Dirty Work, when it would have
> been obvious that Charlie was in no shape to tour
> regardless?


the first time I recall Charlie mentioning a drug problem was in an interview with Q magazine a few months before the 60 Minutes interviw. It was put to him that he had been spotted coming out of a rehab clinic a few years back and he admitted right away that he had had a heroin problem

Mick and Keith didnt really need their feuding hyped up, but it was interesting at the time that DW came out that Mick refused to tour because "the bandmembers health was so bad that they "werent fit enough to cross the Champs Elysees let alone go on the road". Most people at the time just naturally assumed he would have been referring to Keith or Ronnie.

The only legal problem I recall Charlie having in recent years was in the early 90's when he was fined for refusing (like many British people did) to pay his council tax. The tax bill was only a few hundred quid but he refused to pay it on a point of principle

Hi Gazza,

I remember the quote Mick gave (I probably taped it) and at the time I assumed he was talking about Keith or Ronnie. I do recall seeing/reading interviews by Keith being pissed off with Mick for not wanting to tour when he would have known Charlie couldn't tour anyway.
I'm actually amazed that no press knew about Charlie's situation in the 80's.