The new clues that suggest missing Richey staged his own dissapearance

[Futurologist]

Originally Posted by Bryter Layter

Sorry, I didn’t mean to make it sound like it wasn’t sad because it is. If he truly meant it and didn’t just leave the parcel and message as part of the mystery, then that is sad. I just think what he did to his family is awful. No gift, no note, no anything for them. It’s beyond cruel.

Not knowing Richey's frame of mind when he disappeared, but his disordered frame of mind, if it was that, may have rationalized not leaving anything for his family as a kindness. It's only in hindsight, I think, that his long disappearance appears cruel. Maybe when he left, he didn't expect to disappear, or planned it.

Also, hai everyone, it's been over a year. Be kind.

[Mr Richey]

Originally Posted by sofarsideways

I've been rewatching a few documentaries as I've totally gone under full Manics spell with all this happening, and there's a few things worth re-mentioning from the Close Up one.

Nicky says 'we grew up together', talks about living down the road from Richey, their streets playing football against each other, calling him Teddy Edwards because he was 'this cuddly little fella'. SOUNDS PRETTY FRIENDLY. Like, we know this. We all know this. I can't believe we're having to defend it, but here we are. James also talks about 'wondering, when we were 18/19, what are we doing, four lads still holed up in our room like this?' 18/19. STILL holed up. FOUR lads.

Nicky saying they all bought into 'outsider chic' to begin with, but the rest of them grew out of it, while 'Richey just didn't have enough outside the band'. Again, I know we know this. Just repeating... for those... at the back.

Several very helpful insights from Terri Hall. This is where the 'Richey how are you going to get married, you don't have a girlfriend!' thing comes from. She attributed it to looking at her and Philip, and Graham and Sherry, and says he said he'd be married 'by the end of the year'. Which year? '93 or '94 surely. If the proposal thing is legit, there you have it. Super romance.

She also said she didn't think Nicky would want to carry on after Richey went missing, that he was the closest to Richey. I think. She. Would know. And she said 'Richey didn't know how to live and be happy' so he'd try to model it, and that being in the band was making him unwell but he couldn't bear the alternative.

Sean and Nicky both speak of the horror of seeing Richey in hospital and feeling they had to get him out of there - 'you're not going to get better here'. If that's what's meant by 'making him leave early to go on tour', then sure, honey, sure.

Nicky talks about their last rehearsals being a really lovely, happy time, and said that Richey was 'very cuddly', which killed me all over again. He also speaks about a Japanese promoter talking about 'losing honour' when they cancelled a tour - 'I don't care about your honour, we're not going to do a tour when our best mate's missing.' OUR BEST MATE.

He also speaks of going straight to Richey's flat and just waiting outside for him as soon as he heard he was missing, and being in ‘constant contact’ with Richey’s parents in the months that followed. He says the band have it easy in comparison to Richey’s family.

Sean says Richey had left everything behind in his flat, 'just taken off in what he was wearing'.

Apologies for a long post of paraphrasing from a documentary anyone can go and watch on Youtube and we've all probably seen numerous times, but a) some of this is worth bringing up again with all our pondering, and b) this is just from one documentary, from 1998, and it all flies in the face of what this book is pushing. Over and over they prove this shit wrong, with utter tenderness and honesty. I fucking love this band.

EDIT: Shadows and Words, Nicky says he’d had Richey’s lyrics in a bedroom cupboard since they were given to him (at the last rehearsals with the little gifts and things, as mentioned in the Close Up doc), and that James and Sean had facsimile copies. But SHR seems to think they nicked them from his flat or something. Stay tuned for more from Sofa Revisits!

Crushing it Sofa; it’s almost like we already have all the relevant information surrounding Richey’s disappearance and don’t, in fact, need any new book on the subject. Weird...

[sim]

The God Is In The TV article has been removed. Hmmm.

[sofarsideways]

Originally Posted by Mr Richey

Crushing it Sofa; it’s almost like we already have all the relevant information surrounding Richey’s disappearance and don’t, in fact, need any new book on the subject. Weird...

You can literally pick up anything from any era and corroborate this information. If they were lying they wouldn’t be able to keep up with themselves. And they simply have no reason to. I’m reading JFPL interviews now, that being the time other than when Richey was around or went missing that there was heavy Richey talk, and it’s just... you can’t read this and be like NO! EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE!! MASTERS OF THEIR OWN NARRATIVE!!! DRAG THEMMM. There’d have to be something so very wrong with you.

Nicky in the Guardian in 2009: "From Thailand to the smashing up of the Astoria, it was hospitalisation, no money, drudgery, hateful, miserable, awful," says Wire. "It felt like Richey was drifting away. I'd just lost him. Couldn't talk about rugby or cricket or football. He'd call you up at strange times about some documentary he'd just seen or something he'd tracked down. It was hard work, it was baffling at times. He was finding it really hard to sleep. When people talk about the wounds or the blood, the only real tragedy is when you lose someone kinetically, someone you've known since he was five, you've done all those things with and you feel you can't communicate. It was terrible. But in the last three weeks, there was a serene calmness to Richey, he was laughing more, the pathos and the irony were back. Maybe that's because he had reached some conclusions and he just felt some inner peace. We did a recording session and came up with some great tracks. So the Daily Telegraph and the Mars bar, I just saw it as a little 'Things are going to be OK'. Which maybe, in his mind, that's what it was." He sighs. "But different meanings of OK, I guess.”

Why would you want to take anything more away from him.

EDIT: didn’t mean *you* with all that you-ing, Mr Richey! My agreement may have become unclear in rage and feelings

[newdawnfades]

Originally Posted by sofarsideways

You can literally pick up anything from any era and corroborate this information. If they were lying they wouldn’t be able to keep up with themselves. And they simply have no reason to. I’m reading JFPL interviews now, that being the time other than when Richey was around or went missing that there was heavy Richey talk, and it’s just... you can’t read this and be like NO! EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE!! MASTERS OF THEIR OWN NARRATIVE!!! DRAG THEMMM. There’d have to be something so very wrong with you.

Nicky in the Guardian in 2009: "From Thailand to the smashing up of the Astoria, it was hospitalisation, no money, drudgery, hateful, miserable, awful," says Wire. "It felt like Richey was drifting away. I'd just lost him. Couldn't talk about rugby or cricket or football. He'd call you up at strange times about some documentary he'd just seen or something he'd tracked down. It was hard work, it was baffling at times. He was finding it really hard to sleep. When people talk about the wounds or the blood, the only real tragedy is when you lose someone kinetically, someone you've known since he was five, you've done all those things with and you feel you can't communicate. It was terrible. But in the last three weeks, there was a serene calmness to Richey, he was laughing more, the pathos and the irony were back. Maybe that's because he had reached some conclusions and he just felt some inner peace. We did a recording session and came up with some great tracks. So the Daily Telegraph and the Mars bar, I just saw it as a little 'Things are going to be OK'. Which maybe, in his mind, that's what it was." He sighs. "But different meanings of OK, I guess.”

Why would you want to take anything more away from him.

EDIT: didn’t mean *you* with all that you-ing, Mr Richey! My agreement may have become unclear in rage and feelings

That part about the serene and calmness has always made me think the same.He had made the biggest decision of his life and was planning on following whatever it was up.

That last gig at the Astoria was a great gig but thinking back as I was there, something in my head and many others knew "something" was about to change after that. What happened next took all of us by surprise.

I'm so glad, people are still discussing the band and Richey, it's great seeing this after being a fan for so long.

[Mr Richey]

SOFA: Nah, I got that it wasn’t aimed at me mate

I don’t see how anybody can think that the Manics haven’t been as transparent as they can reasonably be in all of the years since Richey left. They’ve stopped short of pouring their hearts out but only just! Disgusts me that they’re being made out to be the villains in all of this.

[mishima]

Wasn't going to, but as everyone else has had their two penneth..

Since reading the Wales Online article and the following discussions on here, like everyone else I have been bothered by the insinuation that the band have been lees than transparent in their statements regarding the periods up too and following Richey's disappearance. It has been bothering me because of the legal implications of the suggestion.

When Richey went missing, statements will have been given to the police. Martin will have had to make one when he reported the disappearance, as James was the last 'close associate' (I'm ignoring any suggested casual acquaintances) to see him before he absconded he is also likely to have given a statement. Other members of the band/management may also have spoken to the police. Whatever was said in those interviews will have had to be truthful to their knowledge, and would also have had to fully reckon with whatever the band told Richey's family.

For his sister and these authors to imply that the band have been less than truthful in their statements, would thus imply they told falsehoods to the police. Now that is serious, it is also possibly libellous. If any redactions have been made to the book (or interviews removed), as has been suggested, then I'm wondering are they relating to this? The libel laws in the UK are antiquated and brutal (which is why the UK is a favoured place for libel cases) if the band decided to take the author/publisher to court claiming libel, as the accusers they would not have to prove that they did not tell falsehoods, it would be for the defendant (ie. publisher /author) to prove that they did. You can't prove someone told a falsehood on hypotheticals ('well your Honour, you can see from the pictures stuck to this box which was left behind...'), you need actual factual, hard incontrovertible evidence ( 'well your Honour, as you can see from Mr Jones diary entry of 3rd Feb 1995, where he writes ' Dear Diary, today James fibbed in the statement he gave to PC Particular..'), which does not exist except in the conspiratorial minds of a small number of, whatever you wish to call them.

Also how can you tell a lie, word for word for 25 years without a slip up? All it would take would be a loose tongue after a couple of beers, and hey presto! DCI Particular is at your door waving a piece of paper, ''ere thats not what you told me in your statement Jimbo'. You would have to be a complete psychopath to repeat a lie seamlessly for 25 years!

Anyway rant over, it's off my chest, off to watch an episode of Endeavour (now he would have cracked it!!) Ciao.

[Mr Richey]

Originally Posted by mishima

Wasn't going to, but as everyone else has had their two penneth..

Since reading the Wales Online article and the following discussions on here, like everyone else I have been bothered by the insinuation that the band have been lees than transparent in their statements regarding the periods up too and following Richey's disappearance. It has been bothering me because of the legal implications of the suggestion.

When Richey went missing, statements will have been given to the police. Martin will have had to make one when he reported the disappearance, as James was the last 'close associate' (I'm ignoring any suggested casual acquaintances) to see him before he absconded he is also likely to have given a statement. Other members of the band/management may also have spoken to the police. Whatever was said in those interviews will have had to be truthful to their knowledge, and would also have had to fully reckon with whatever the band told Richey's family.

For his sister and these authors to imply that the band have been less than truthful in their statements, would thus imply they told falsehoods to the police. Now that is serious, it is also possibly libellous. If any redactions have been made to the book (or interviews removed), as has been suggested, then I'm wondering are they relating to this? The libel laws in the UK are antiquated and brutal (which is why the UK is a favoured place for libel cases) if the band decided to take the author/publisher to court claiming libel, as the accusers they would not have to prove that they did not tell falsehoods, it would be for the defendant (ie. publisher /author) to prove that they did. You can't prove someone told a falsehood on hypotheticals ('well your Honour, you can see from the pictures stuck to this box which was left behind...'), you need actual factual, hard incontrovertible evidence ( 'well your Honour, as you can see from Mr Jones diary entry of 3rd Feb 1995, where he writes ' Dear Diary, today James fibbed in the statement he gave to PC Particular..'), which does not exist except in the conspiratorial minds of a small number of, whatever you wish to call them.

Also how can you tell a lie, word for word for 25 years without a slip up? All it would take would be a loose tongue after a couple of beers, and hey presto! DCI Particular is at your door waving a piece of paper, ''ere thats not what you told me in your statement Jimbo'. You would have to be a complete psychopath to repeat a lie seamlessly for 25 years!

Anyway rant over, it's off my chest, off to watch an episode of Endeavour (now he would have cracked it!!) Ciao.

*applauds*

[Velocitygirl]

So, that GIITT interview's been taken down and the book is once more delayed (until the 28th February). Sorry, but they cannot pass this off as just a minor "editing issue". In fact, I seriously hope it's because the band and their management are standing up for themselves and taking the authors to the cleaner's.

[Mr Richey]

Originally Posted by Velocitygirl

So, that GIITT interview's been taken down and the book is once more delayed (until the 28th February). Sorry, but they cannot pass this off as just a minor "editing issue". In fact, I seriously hope it's because the band and their management are standing up for themselves and taking the authors to the cleaner's.

I for one hope the book never sees the light of day.

[Porco]

I hope both Rachel and the band and anyone else who knew Richey can find some peace and get some answers some day. I’m not sure this book is going to do that for them.

I’ve been quite restrained in my comments but I don’t particularly disagree with much anyone else has said and I’m kind of proud of you all. I think some of what has been said is speculating about a book based on interviews (that do set alarm bells ringing, to fair) but the whole thing feels very very... ‘off’.

Originally Posted by Futurologist

Be kind.

Also this, very much this.

[Glass Angel]

Originally Posted by Mr Richey

I for one hope the book never sees the light of day.

Yep, I was looking forward to it when I first heard about ‘working with family, access to Richey’s archive’ etc, but it sounds like nothing more than rumours and armchair psychology. Sad, really. Hopefully Simon Price will update Everything, I know some here don’t like him, but his book was warm and sincere, if not 100% true!

[Velocitygirl]

Originally Posted by Mr Richey

I for one hope the book never sees the light of day.

Same here. 100%

[sim]

Originally Posted by Glass Angel

Hopefully Simon Price will update Everything, I know some here don’t like him, but his book was warm and sincere, if not 100% true!

He omitted such important details of Sean's story, perpetuating a horrible myth throughout the years, and wouldn't redact when asked. So if he does update it, I'd rather hope to see an apology. And Sean's correct birthdate.

I'm really pleased that so many fans are being incredibly careful and analytical about all this.

I may post more about it later.

[Glass Angel]

Originally Posted by sim

He omitted such important details of Sean's story, perpetuating a horrible myth throughout the years, and wouldn't redact when asked. So if he does update it, I'd rather hope to see an apology. And Sean's correct birthdate.

I'm really pleased that so many fans are being incredibly careful and analytical about all this.

I may post more about it later.

Oh, I hadn’t heard that. Could you elaborate?