Sid and Nancy

[Marky Dread]

I actually knew the lead detective on the case when I wrote for NYPD Blue. He was a real old school character and we got lots of incredible stories we used from him. He was involved in 70's-style corruption too, with Sonny the French Connection guy, though always proclaimed his innocence (he squeezed out of it even though he was taped on a wire on the Brooklyn Bridge). Our police advisor/producer (lead detective on the Son of Sam) always told us he was guilty. However, the idea that they didn't conduct a full investigation isn't true. They talked to everyone, Neon Leon and the like, and they thought Sid did it. The truth is that when it comes to murder the simplest answer is the correct one a vast majority of the time.

Houseman?

[Dr. Medulla]

I actually knew the lead detective on the case when I wrote for NYPD Blue. He was a real old school character and we got lots of incredible stories we used from him. He was involved in 70's-style corruption too, with Sonny the French Connection guy, though always proclaimed his innocence (he squeezed out of it even though he was taped on a wire on the Brooklyn Bridge). Our police advisor/producer (lead detective on the Son of Sam) always told us he was guilty. However, the idea that they didn't conduct a full investigation isn't true. They talked to everyone, Neon Leon and the like, and they thought Sid did it. The truth is that when it comes to murder the simplest answer is the correct one a vast majority of the time.

I agree. But we disagree on what the simplest answer is. A predatory figure in the junkie scene, especially when it was known that they carried a decent wad of cash, sounds simpler to me than a guy in the depths of heroin addiction after (presumably) an argument. I don't discount the idea that Sid did it—a history of violence in a mutually self-destructive relationship—but I am jaundiced about the sincerity of the police towards pursuing the truth rather than closing a case, especially in one where justice for a junkie and her notorious shitheel boyfriend were concerned. They just weren't worth a demanding investigation when the initial suspect confesses and nobody else will stand up for him. Everyone involved—cops, witnesses, maybe Sid himself—had, if not an interest in Sid being convicted, no interest in having him walk.

[Marky Dread]

I actually knew the lead detective on the case when I wrote for NYPD Blue. He was a real old school character and we got lots of incredible stories we used from him. He was involved in 70's-style corruption too, with Sonny the French Connection guy, though always proclaimed his innocence (he squeezed out of it even though he was taped on a wire on the Brooklyn Bridge). Our police advisor/producer (lead detective on the Son of Sam) always told us he was guilty. However, the idea that they didn't conduct a full investigation isn't true. They talked to everyone, Neon Leon and the like, and they thought Sid did it. The truth is that when it comes to murder the simplest answer is the correct one a vast majority of the time.

I agree. But we disagree on what the simplest answer is. A predatory figure in the junkie scene, especially when it was known that they carried a decent wad of cash, sounds simpler to me than a guy in the depths of heroin addiction after (presumably) an argument. I don't discount the idea that Sid did it—a history of violence in a mutually self-destructive relationship—but I am jaundiced about the sincerity of the police towards pursuing the truth rather than closing a case, especially in one where justice for a junkie and her notorious shitheel boyfriend were concerned. They just weren't worth a demanding investigation when the initial suspect confesses and nobody else will stand up for him. Everyone involved—cops, witnesses, maybe Sid himself—had, if not an interest in Sid being convicted, no interest in having him walk.

In fairness the info regarding this mysterious "Michael" guy only came to light years after. The female who mentioned that she knew it was Michael who killed Nancy was never questioned by police. She was staying in the floor above at the Chelsea so the police work does not appear to be too thorough.

[Dr. Medulla]

I actually knew the lead detective on the case when I wrote for NYPD Blue. He was a real old school character and we got lots of incredible stories we used from him. He was involved in 70's-style corruption too, with Sonny the French Connection guy, though always proclaimed his innocence (he squeezed out of it even though he was taped on a wire on the Brooklyn Bridge). Our police advisor/producer (lead detective on the Son of Sam) always told us he was guilty. However, the idea that they didn't conduct a full investigation isn't true. They talked to everyone, Neon Leon and the like, and they thought Sid did it. The truth is that when it comes to murder the simplest answer is the correct one a vast majority of the time.

I agree. But we disagree on what the simplest answer is. A predatory figure in the junkie scene, especially when it was known that they carried a decent wad of cash, sounds simpler to me than a guy in the depths of heroin addiction after (presumably) an argument. I don't discount the idea that Sid did it—a history of violence in a mutually self-destructive relationship—but I am jaundiced about the sincerity of the police towards pursuing the truth rather than closing a case, especially in one where justice for a junkie and her notorious shitheel boyfriend were concerned. They just weren't worth a demanding investigation when the initial suspect confesses and nobody else will stand up for him. Everyone involved—cops, witnesses, maybe Sid himself—had, if not an interest in Sid being convicted, no interest in having him walk.

In fairness the info regarding this mysterious "Michael" guy only came to light years after. The female who mentioned that she knew it was Michael who killed Nancy was never questioned by police. She was staying in the floor above at the Chelsea so the police work does not appear to be too thorough.

Oh certainly. I'm not suggesting anything sinister or consciously deceptive on the part of the police. They had a plausible scenario that solved the case. That doesn't mean it's a probable one.

[Marky Dread]

I actually knew the lead detective on the case when I wrote for NYPD Blue. He was a real old school character and we got lots of incredible stories we used from him. He was involved in 70's-style corruption too, with Sonny the French Connection guy, though always proclaimed his innocence (he squeezed out of it even though he was taped on a wire on the Brooklyn Bridge). Our police advisor/producer (lead detective on the Son of Sam) always told us he was guilty. However, the idea that they didn't conduct a full investigation isn't true. They talked to everyone, Neon Leon and the like, and they thought Sid did it. The truth is that when it comes to murder the simplest answer is the correct one a vast majority of the time.

I agree. But we disagree on what the simplest answer is. A predatory figure in the junkie scene, especially when it was known that they carried a decent wad of cash, sounds simpler to me than a guy in the depths of heroin addiction after (presumably) an argument. I don't discount the idea that Sid did it—a history of violence in a mutually self-destructive relationship—but I am jaundiced about the sincerity of the police towards pursuing the truth rather than closing a case, especially in one where justice for a junkie and her notorious shitheel boyfriend were concerned. They just weren't worth a demanding investigation when the initial suspect confesses and nobody else will stand up for him. Everyone involved—cops, witnesses, maybe Sid himself—had, if not an interest in Sid being convicted, no interest in having him walk.

In fairness the info regarding this mysterious "Michael" guy only came to light years after. The female who mentioned that she knew it was Michael who killed Nancy was never questioned by police. She was staying in the floor above at the Chelsea so the police work does not appear to be too thorough.

Oh certainly. I'm not suggesting anything sinister or consciously deceptive on the part of the police. They had a plausible scenario that solved the case. That doesn't mean it's a probable one.

I still think they probably went with option one, the easiest option. Oddly in todays climate Sid would've been front page news for months and the case would've lasted forever.

[TeddyB Not Logged In]

Uh huh. More likely that Marianne Faithfull's boyfriend killed Jim Morrison, as she's now said, than anyone but Sid killed Nancy. Also, closing a case means nothing without a confession, because to lose at trial is the big disaster. Of course, they had a confession from "the dirty dog."

[Marky Dread]

Uh huh. More likely that Marianne Faithfull's boyfriend killed Jim Morrison, as she's now said, than anyone but Sid killed Nancy. Also, closing a case means nothing without a confession, because to lose at trial is the big disaster. Of course, they had a confession from "the dirty dog."

I suppose he could've killed her before he nodded out. But you know what if Sid and Nancy had a fight Sid would lose everytime he was so wimpy. "the dirty dog" just Sid living up to the image if he truly said it.

I remember how he was treated for his image and not for being a person. That news bulletin where the guy says "Sid is no longer vicious, he's dead" sums up how he was percieved by the media.

[TeddyB Not Logged In]

Nancy could have been out of it. A fight for the knife. Or the posited murder suicide. As for Sid, the Clash sure liked him personally.

[Marky Dread]

Nancy could have been out of it. A fight for the knife. Or the posited murder suicide. As for Sid, the Clash sure liked him personally.

Yep I ended up going to the Lyceum due to the Music Machine Sid benefit being oversold.