Wednesday, July 27, 2011


Of course not. Sadly, she passed away at the tender age of 27 - as did Hendrix, Cobain and many other young talented musicians. And it will be no surprise if she died of the same causes...but the toxicology reports have so far been inconclusive, and the press awaits a final verdict. As well they should.

Many would not even wait for such results to figure out that some combination of ketamine, crack or other drugs put her cold in earth. She, unlike Sean Hoare, was not a whistleblower on a billionaire who may be a sick criminal with an axe to grind. She was her own worst enemy. So little mystery surrounds her demise. But as obvious as it seems to most that hers was drug induced, there is still the protocol to follow of waiting for test results and not jumping to conclusions. Someone could always have poisoned her or murdered her in some other way, or she could have died of some undetected illness. We wait for facts.

Except in the case of a man whose death was possibly beneficial for Murdoch...then we just jump to a neat little conclusion and we hear no more - even the New York Times is not giving us any more on this. Case closed. Nothing to see here folks. He was a junkie, as some of his fellow hacks told us, so there...

Personally I do not believe he was a junkie, he seemed too in control and also, that label comes from his enemies, not a series of rehab clinics. But even if he was, it would be proper to let the toxicology reports come in before any verdict. The failure to follow protocol in his case is in itself grounds for suspicion. And it stands in contrast to the Winehouse case, which the Murdoch press is now using to sell more of its papers. So at least she did not die in vain, whatever she did die of. Which, as I said, I suspect was the drugs. Rupert did not murder her.

No comments: