Fallen On Deaf Ears
Ξ March 14th, 2006 | → | ∇ News |
East London and West Essex have reported more on the letter Michael sent to TL…
Why did I title the post “Fallen on Deaf Ears”?, well, it was the first thing that came to mind after reading the article.
Someone once said only about 10% of what you read in papers is true. Well, I don’t know that as a fact, but it is something to bear in mind when we read things in papers and when we comment on what we read. So with that said…
Aparantly Michaels letter has been interpreted as a “feeble attack”
Commenting on the letter, sent from New Zealand where Mr Barrymore now lives, Mr Lubbock said: “He’s trying to attack. It’s a feeble attack. I believe we have Barrymore on the back foot. I think he’s running out of room to manoeuvre.”
A feeble attack??? I can’t get over it. How can that letter be made out to be a feeble attack? I dont understand.
Its more like a “Come on Terry, I’m willing to work with you, but we’re not going to get very far if you keep making these accusations against me and refusing to look at the whole picture”
And we read:
Tony Bennett, who failed in a recent attempt to bring a private prosecution against Mr Barrymore, said of the letter: “It’s an error of judgement to have written it. It would have been better not to have written it. It doesn’t take the case any further. It doesn’t help the situation at all. What is needed is somebody to talk about what happened before he (Stuart) was found (in the pool).
So talk about what happened before and ignor what happened afterwards then? So I guess they have already made up their mind as to what they believe happened and are not interest in the possibility that something may have occured afterwards?
They seem to be ignoring Michael telling TL that there is nothing more he can add, instead they are expecting him to add more information otherwise anything besides that Michael tries to say isn’t constructive?
The focus is still on Michael! Is it just me or are they not listening to what Michael is saying to them? Hense falling on deaf ears?
Let me ask a question, if it was you or me in this situation, would you still be willing to help?
The letter ends: “I am prepared to honour our agreement to work together but you must be constructive and not keep ignoring proven facts. If we can persuade the police to assist, their first enquiry should be into the ‘missing eight hours’.”
Michael is obviously still prepared to help - if it were me, I would not be. I would of had enough and told them to get on with it. It seems to me the more involvement Michael has, the more amunition he gives them to turn it back around onto him. He’s not going to persuade them, and you can’t say he hasn’t tried but if he writes a personal letter to TL and then TL runs to the papers with it, then whats the point?
In my opinion, Michael has given up enough for this, he’s tried to help and its gotten him nowhere.
I write these things and wonder if I come across as being biased, but then I talk about what I read with I believe to be common sense. From the bits of the letter that TL has had published, I can see no form of attack.
I’m sorry to say, but I think anything Michael does or says will not be enough because it appears to me that they are only focused on getting Michael to explain everything that went on, which Michael can’t do of course because he doesn’t know. It seems to me that they just don’t believe what Michael has said, and if that’s the case, then where do you go from there?
I just get the feeling now that if Michael has any form of contact with TL, its going to be in the papers, its not going to be a private matter.
In my eyes, its not Michael who is doing the attacking.
May 16th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Everyone will c through Terry Lubbock this is a total tit for tat case.
Using Michael’s name just for publicity is damn right disgusting.
Michael isn’t responsible for SL death.
I hope that Michael ontime gets his comeuppance on Terry, whilist its a tragic loss I hate what has happened to Michael.
I love Michael with all my heart, don’t worry love it will all come out in the end.
My support and love is always with you.
Take note of all my letters that I send to you.
Your a brave, gentle lovable man.
How can you be any different then you can be my love.
Take it steady aah.xxxxxxxxxxx
I love you and always will and be there for you.
March 28th, 2006 at 4:44 pm
I know what you mean Liz. There is only me and my son in my house and half the time I don’t know what he is up to. Thankfully the cat still has his hair and the parrot is still squwarking well.
March 28th, 2006 at 4:06 pm
He might be hot news Baz but I don’t think he is responsible for getting it in the press as you implied with your comment that he ‘makes his choices who he tells’ (maybe I misunderstood you, but that is how it came across). I am certain it is not his choice - after all, he went to NZ to get away from the press. So why would he go to them in NZ when all he wants is to get on with his life as is his right after 5 years. It is surely not his wish to talk about something about which he obviously knows no more than he has already said on numerous occasions - and that is actually very little.
Because I believe him when he says he didn’t know what his guests were doing all of the time that night. My house probably has about 25% of the floor area of Michael’s house if that, and I don’t know what people get up to most of the time. I have had children painting the walls, cutting each other’s hair, the dog chewing up the furniture etc. It just seems strange that some people find it so hard to comprehend that in such a huge sprawling complex as Michael’s house, that he maybe didn’t see what happened.
March 28th, 2006 at 3:54 pm
Liz with reference to Kylie Merritt, I am sorry can not agree with you on this, if she lied at the Inquest and has commited Perjury then I am affraid she most be brought to book. There is indeed every reason to prosecute if the items reported in the NWW are true, enough lies lets get to the truth. The statements she made at the inquest have had a devasting effect on Michael. Not forgeting her brother Justin Merritt said similar things about Michael & Cocaine.
March 28th, 2006 at 3:30 pm
Liz, I understand Michael is very hot news in NZ. I have family down there & they tell me the Lubbock saga is the Talk of Auckland. I have seen a photo, of the letter it clearly reads from Cone & Co, Auckland NZ,it has been cc to Michael Reed QC, take it that he is Michael’s QC in NZ, as Michael Mansfield QC was his barrister at the Epping Inquest.
March 28th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
I don’t think Michael tells the NZ press Baz but they are interested in news about one of their adopted citizens who they seem to like. They too scan the world’s news and reported on Michael’s antics in CBB. He was locked away in the house then and certainly cannot be blamed for any coverage at that time which included reports on the private prosecution. As far as I can see, he has talked far less to the press than the other party has.
PS: Where was the photo of the letter that enabled you to see that it was from Michael’s New Zealand lawyer Baz? Because the newspaper reports about it all said that the letter was from Michael and in the photo that I saw I could only make out that it was it a white envelope with a airmail sticker - that could also have been from Michael, couldn’t it?
March 28th, 2006 at 2:46 pm
I think it was proved/accepted that Michael could not swim, Baz. Although Cheryl did call the police to tell them that Michael could swim, this claim was refuted by a number of people who all said they had seen Michael do nothing more than stand in the shallow end of a swimming pool - never swim. The perjury case against him was dropped because he could prove this beyond all reasonable doubt, to poach a legal phrase. In fact, I believe I read that everyone who knew him said the claim was rubbish - apart from the two you mentioned who had their reasons - rejected wife and possible ex-employee (the latter is only a guess - only my humble opinion - I do not claim it to be fact!!!!)
Whether Michael could swim or not had no influence on the tragic outcome of that night. At least one person immediately jumped in to pull SL out. It isn’t as though they were battling against a strong ocean current but it happened in a small swimming pool.
As for Kylie, I see no reason to prosecute her 5 years later. She is probably a different person now and should not be frightened into possibly lying again - this is also only my opinion!
March 28th, 2006 at 10:43 am
Paul
Kylie Merrit is the person in question, I think there is new investigation by Essex Police into Kylie Merritt and what she has told the NWW and what she said on that lie dector test. Probably without realising more interested in earning a fast buck she may have given the opportunity for a reopening of the Inquest.
Michael and the swimming matter, I think there were two winesses Cheryl and his trainer who said he could swim, yes think this was dropped.
March 28th, 2006 at 2:41 am
I wasnt able to post twice as the site wouldnt accept them(some technicla glitch lost 2 posts..)(to explain “test” if that was cryptic!!)loved the piece ending in spangles…I will try them!!!
to Baz…there was a perjury charge levelled at Michael for a while(re not being able to swim etc)..but I think then dropped..and shown to be false charge…and its turned full circle…and one of the witnesses at pool party was investigated…for perjury..(dont know what happened re that matter?anyone know?)..because she gave a lie detector test to news of the world..which contradicted what she said at coroner’s court.
March 27th, 2006 at 10:52 pm
Karen Kaye is still Michael’s agent in New Zealand
so guess all is OK as still listed with her.
Everything is being reported in New Zealand on the Lubbock saga has been reported on TV & in the press the New Zealand Herald has done a lot on it. At the end of the day Michael makes his own choices who he tells.
March 25th, 2006 at 8:47 pm
I’m surprised he didn’t tell his NZ agent Baz. I suppose he wasn’t sure how it was going to work out. Since his antics in CBB were reported in the NZ newspapers once it started, he didn’t keep it secret very long. I just hope she wasn’t offended by him not confiding in her.
March 25th, 2006 at 7:42 pm
Well, you know better than me. Agents/managers/pa’s whatever? I dont know or need to know for that matter.
March 25th, 2006 at 2:50 pm
Mike Browne was Michael’s PA never been his agent, Anne Chudleigh was I think his agent in UK, for a time he had a person called Diana Howey as his Agent in UK , getting all very confusing, who does what for Michael.
Karen Kay his ajent in NZ, thought he came back to UK for just a holiday.
March 25th, 2006 at 1:36 pm
Yes, Chrissy Smith is his PR secretary. Oh sorry, just realised what you were asking for. Agent as in for work? Karen Kay Management is his NZ agent - and as far as I know Mike Browne is his UK agent.
March 25th, 2006 at 1:22 pm
Not sure you are right on that she has been quoted as his PR Secretary, Chrissy Smith & Associates are a PR company.
March 25th, 2006 at 12:49 pm
Chrissy Smith is his agent/representitive in the UK.