4 thoughts on “31. John Lear

  • December 30, 2012 at 6:16 am

    Lear’s account and Lambright’s account don’t seem to match up with each other. Even if we take Lear’s account, though, I can still understand why Lambright was upset with Lear.

    By the way, the new music is frelling awesome!!!

    • December 31, 2012 at 3:05 am

      To respond to the first poster, I’m happy to answer any questions about differences between John’s story and my own if it is important. I heard a few differences myself. However, after listening to John’s interview, there is one claim John made that I want to deny immediately.
      In fairness to John, after 25 years memories do fade or at least can contain grey areas, but John’s statement that I had any knowledge of Paul being angry because he thought John was going to go ‘direct to Congress’ with Paul’s claims is totally false. At best John simply misspoke or misremembered, but regardless, I will swear that I have never had any knowledge of what transpired between Paul and John that left Paul so upset. The first I ever heard anything suggesting that John may have led Paul to believe he (John) would try to get Congressional interest, and then did not, is when John stated it in this interview. Did John tell Paul that and is that what Paul was angry about? Who knows. But I certainly did not know then and do not to this day.
      Having known Paul, even considering the extreme ideas he was entertaining by then, I find it extremely unlikely that in the short amount of time after John’s visit, Paul (or anyone) would have expected Congress to act that quickly on any request, especially anything like what John has implied. So whatever Paul was angry about still comes back to John, and Paul apparently became aware of it fairly quickly. Even so, the question has only been significant to me because it so closely preceded Paul cutting off all communication–saying Paul was angry is an understatement.
      The description of how the O.H. Krill memo came about is also a bit self-serving it seems to me. When John told me about it as we were standing in his own study, it was not so innocent sounding. But enough said…
      John is free to say what he wants and word things in whatever way suits him, and at this late date there is little way to verify much of anything. But to state that I had any idea why Paul was angry, or suggest I had heard anything relating to Congress, is absolutely false.
      -Chris Lambright

      • December 31, 2012 at 6:54 pm

        Thanks for your input Chris and Happy New Year.

        Your memory is apparently better than mine so we’ll just have to let the O.H. Krill issue pass on with your memory as correct.

        As to the Bennewitz/Congress issue this must be yet another faulty memory of mine but that is the way I remember it. Somebody told me
        when I asked what triggered Paul’s irritation, “He was upset because he thought you were going to take his issue to Congress and you didn’t.”
        That’s the way I remember the conversation whoever it was between.

        Again, Happy New Year and all the best.

        John Lear

        • December 31, 2012 at 9:04 pm

          Well, that seemed to get resolved quite nicely!

Comments are closed.