When i researched my book on Brian Jones i got in touch with Norman
Pilcher. It's a long story, but here is his autobiography. Enjoy.
[webgrafikk.com]

Quote
paulspendel
When i researched my book on Brian Jones i got in touch with Norman
Pilcher. It's a long story, but here is his autobiography. Enjoy.
[webgrafikk.com]

When I was in London in 1967 I tried to find a disgusting moron, guess who.
The book you mention, I wouldn't even use as toilet paper ...

Here we go again, the yelling and abuse. When you look at history in a balanced way you also take into account the vision of people you may not like. It's a known principle, but it doesn't seem to apply in your world.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-08-10 13:06 by paulspendel.

I understand your response, Paul. But due to a (luckily long) lifetime experience I learned to distinguish between people who are really regretful about what they did in the past and those who are masters (!) in finding the most incredible excuses no to.
It's good to know for fans (Beatles, Stones, etc.) that there were people, both in the U.K. and the USA, who knew very, very well what they were doing at the time trying to destroy "our heroes".
ANY excuse, how fantastically put into words in a book, trying to make money out of fans of the bands they almost destroyed, is totally worthless. I hope you never ran into those kind of people, but there are plenty around.
Taking into account visions of people who did (deliberately) wrong in the most clear way possible, is an insult to oneself. What's the difference between a guy who killed John Lennon deliberately and one who almost killed/destroyed some who are/were dear to us ... deliberately (hiding behind his job is never an excuse).
I'm sure you mean good, but keep your eyes open.

It amazes me people on fora tend to speculate for years what happened and when the real answers come they shy away from it. Yes, his actions hurt Lennon and Harrison and Jones. But it’s really interesting to learn for the first time the mechanism behind it.

Paul, Paul .... speculate? ... real answers? ... What do you know? I saw interviews of that guy, apart from reading about him. Seeing someone's face while talking can say a lot, believe me.
I mentioned to you before that I saw Frank Thorogood "live" the day after Brian was murdered. I didn't have a clue who he was (a "so-called" friend of Brian ...), but could smell trouble right through the TV screen on July 4, 1969.
Well, the "smell" didn't betray me. Some faces are burned in my brain, and I'm glad they are. That keeps my eyes open.
My words here could be much, much harder, but I know that bv doesn't like that and I respect him too much.

Quote
paulspendel
It amazes me people on fora tend to speculate for years what happened and when the real answers come they shy away from it. Yes, his actions hurt Lennon and Harrison and Jones. But it’s really interesting to learn for the first time the mechanism behind it.

It does sound interesting.. as does your long story of getting in touch with him.
Not sure I would want to pad his bank account by purchasing it though.

"The man who arrested The Beatles and The Rolling Stones would pay the ultimate price for his service. Finally he sets the record straight."
From the publishers description, "paid the ultimate price" confused me a bit, as that typically refers to someone who lost their life.
I suppose losing your job and going to prison is a heavy price, but...


Look forward to reading reviews/excerpts about the book though.
Interesting times for certain.

Georgie48, It’s impossible you ever saw an interview with Norman Pilcher. No way. You challenge the facts but don’t seem the present correct facts yourself.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-08-10 16:38 by paulspendel.

Thank you, MisterDDDD.You are right about the ultimate price. Norman is still alive and wel.

Quote
paulspendel
Georgie48, It’s impossible you ever saw an interview with Norman Pilcher. No way. You challenge the facts but don’t seem the present correct facts yourself.

You're right Paul, strictly speaking yes, not an interview (somebody putting a microphone in front of you) but a view, while arresting. Just like you, I read my eyes out of my head, because the whole situation around Brian felt very uncomfortable until the Tom Kelloch story surfaced, and when Pilcher (I didn't know his name in 1967) surfaced, I "went after him" and saw his "live" face. The man indirectly responsible for Brian's death and Keith's life long frustration.
I do not have/ never had journalistic interests (no need to "make a pact with the devil" to reach a goal), so I analyze and judge freely, without trying to challenge facts, certainly not let anyone who was proven to be a bad guy (what did the judge say?) try to influence me with his "autobiography".
For me life is very simple: any cop who does something a cop is not supposed to do is a criminal.

I sounds like a fine idea to let the other part speak.
It will most certainly not do anything as such, we all know it was a generation-gap-thing anyway, but Pilcher is in his right to tell his side of the story.
The evidence lies in front of us: Pilcher was using questionable and illegal methods to grab his victims, which makes him and his team very dishonest.
But that does not mean our musical heroes should be given a freepass to break the law. Law is law. Drugs are illegal. If Pilcher would grab and arrest the celebrities to set an example, he should at least have stayed clear on his side of the fence. It will be great to hear his story.

Hi Blueranger, a fair assessment, I guess. The interesting thing is the influence of the establishment on these drugs squad chaps.

Always cracked me up: they are handing out heroin and cocaine like candy at the neighborhood chemist shop and yet they are arresting people for a little weed.

People like this don't deserve the fame or money...in the USA any proceeds from a crime are supposed to be forfeited including money made on the sale of books etc. Is it that way where this book is being published?

Just curious if the money has to be donated to some organization or charity.

If it were it might make the book more worthy in my eyes but as it is, fcuk the cops, anything they say is a lie or at least very suspect. Actually that would hold regardless of whether he is being paid or not, but it would make it more palatable if not.

jb

Quote
paulspendel
Hi Blueranger, a fair assessment, I guess. The interesting thing is the influence of the establishment on these drugs squad chaps.

Exactly.

Quote
jbwelda
Always cracked me up: they are handing out heroin and cocaine like candy at the neighborhood chemist shop and yet they are arresting people for a little weed.

People like this don't deserve the fame or money...in the USA any proceeds from a crime are supposed to be forfeited including money made on the sale of books etc. Is it that way where this book is being published?

Just curious if the money has to be donated to some organization or charity.

If it were it might make the book more worthy in my eyes but as it is, fcuk the cops, anything they say is a lie or at least very suspect. Actually that would hold regardless of whether he is being paid or not, but it would make it more palatable if not.

jb

Can’t comment on the financial side of the aspect.
But honestly: ‘A little weed’?!? Are you on the moon? Lennon, Harrison and Jones were hard drug-users by the time Pilcher came forward. In a way we could be grateful he didn’t plant the real drugs they were taking. If so, we had never seen our heroes make music again. ‘@#$%& the cops’?!? Well, you’re assumption is pretty general on the attitude towards cops handing out crack and heroin in the streets. Firstly, it may be how they did it in New York back then. Certainly not in London 1967-1968. A little perspective regarding TIME and PLACE would be nice: This was CONSERVATIVE LONDON in the SIXTIES. It was a far cry from crack-dealers in New York later on! I’m not in any way defending Pilcher or his methods. But to just let yester-years celebrities freeloading on hard drugs was very wrong too. The problem here lies in the fact that there had not been any previous scenario. How could the establishment handle all these new inputs and outputs coming from the young society? It’s only natural they had to react. The methods were incredibly questionable. But every start is always a hard one. And with failures too.

Certainly London 67 - 69. Absolutely. Medical heroin and cocaine was prescribed with regularity. Read Ginger Bakers book just for one instance of actually admitting what they were doing in those days. It wasnt cops "handing out crack and heroin in the streets"; if that was going on it was not what I was referring to.

So, I am confused about your point. The arrests were for cannabis resin (hash) and weed. Hardly "hard drugs". My point was they were harassing them for this minor shit whilst genuine hard drugs were available at the pharmacy with only a little work. Evidently all it took was to find a willing doctor or otherwise convince a real doctor of your need for the drugs for psychological and/or physiological reasons. And of course a little cash never hurt.

Maybe I misunderstand your whole point but believe me, heroin and cocaine were prescribed for any and all who claimed a need. Again, read Ginger Baker's (otherwise very dismissable) account of his early life, before Cream.

And I stick to my offhand assessment of the credibility of any police source, then or now. They, as a group, have proven the lack of any such thing over and over again.

jb

A fascinating aspect to me is that the London Drugs Squad was getting nowhere without proper informants. Shady persons from the inner circles of the pop stars who grassed on their employers. Personally I researched that Spanish Tony was one of them even up until the 1969 Cotchford days...

Have to say I was always pretty sceptical about Tony Sanchez's book tho if I'm being honest I did quite enjoy it (with a bucket of salt).

"I'll be in my basement room with a needle and a spoon."

Quote
Blueranger

Quote
jbwelda
Always cracked me up: they are handing out heroin and cocaine like candy at the neighborhood chemist shop and yet they are arresting people for a little weed.

People like this don't deserve the fame or money...in the USA any proceeds from a crime are supposed to be forfeited including money made on the sale of books etc. Is it that way where this book is being published?

Just curious if the money has to be donated to some organization or charity.

If it were it might make the book more worthy in my eyes but as it is, fcuk the cops, anything they say is a lie or at least very suspect. Actually that would hold regardless of whether he is being paid or not, but it would make it more palatable if not.

jb

The methods were incredibly questionable. But every start is always a hard one. And with failures too.

I agree with what you wrote, and yes failures happen all the time all over the world. But deliberately placing drugs in someone's house, suggesting they were there already, is not a failure, it's a criminal act. And when done by the police it's a multiple level criminal act. Any excuse by any cop any time on this, whether in an "autobiography", or any other way, stinks (and as far as I'm concerned that a modest way of putting it).

The book is not an excuse. It’s his side of the story.

You can pre-order now:
[www.amazon.com]

Quote
georgie48

I agree with what you wrote, and yes failures happen all the time all over the world. But deliberately placing drugs in someone's house, suggesting they were there already, is not a failure, it's a criminal act. And when done by the police it's a multiple level criminal act. Any excuse by any cop any time on this, whether in an "autobiography", or any other way, stinks (and as far as I'm concerned that a modest way of putting it).

Well put. I agree with you.

--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan

Again: The book is not an excuse, it’s an explanation. After reading it you can judge for yourself. It gave me some very unexpected insights.

Quote
paulspendel
Again: The book is not an excuse, it’s an explanation. After reading it you can judge for yourself. It gave me some very unexpected insights.

It looks like you committed yourself heavily to that criminal ...

He was convicted, sent to prison and he did his time. In modern society you are no longer called a criminal after that. However, a small part of society escaped this notion. It can be repaired by reading books and not by repeating the same post on this board over and over again. But that takes courage and a real effort.
By the way, and I find this ironically funny, it was Andrew Loog Oldham himself who taught us how to promote ‘bad guys’ and his tactics still work!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-08-23 15:45 by paulspendel.

Quote
paulspendel
He was convicted, sent to prison and he did his time. In modern society you are no longer called a criminal after that. However, a small part of society escaped this notion. It can be repaired by reading books and not by repeating the same post on this board over and over again. But that takes courage and a real effort.
By the way, and I find this ironically funny, it was Andrew Loog Oldham himself who taught us how to promote ‘bad guys’ and his tactics still work!

Two things, Paul.
Where did you get the idea that in "modern society" a convicted criminal is no longer a criminal? Stealing an apple from a grocery store, okay, but many criminals remain criminal for the rest of their lives (war criminals f.i., but I could mention many other examples, but, again, not out of respect for bv).

And Andrew Oldham's approach of "bad guys" is eons away from "criminals"! Besides, that image lasted only for a few years. I "discovered" The Rolling Stones very early in 1964 through their music (I had to find the band's name through a school mate) and I personally thought Oldham's weird texts on the early albums was "a bit silly" in those days. I'm sure young guys like JordyLicks have no emotional connection whatsoever with that "bad guys" image of Oldham.
No, your guy to me remains a criminal for as long as I live, no matter what he tries to say. No courage needed for that. Interesting way by you of trying to convince fans to waste money on that man.

Norman Pilcher talks to Mojo. So much for free speech and a balanced view Georgie48!
[www.mojo4music.com]

Here you go again Georgie48 [www.mirror.co.uk]

"...he insisted he played by the book".

Yes, it must have been a book with many chapters.