A Bigger Better Brighter Conspiracy with Twenty-First Century Production Values

Posted: June 17, 2013 in People Near Nirvana

As I stated the other day, I’m glad Wallace and Halperin took time to rehash their investigation in a second volume; if you want to read a distillation of the murder theory and the crucial evidence then Love and Death is ‘the one to read’. While Who Killed Kurt Cobain is barely coherent and poorly written, this volume is a far more readable summarisation, however, being a straight rewrite (and a fairly egregious bit of profiteering, two books with barely 10% difference) the book is still guilty of all the flaws of the first volume. At least it placed a few more clear cards on the table and finally spent more time on the evidence than on name-calling.

…But, to repeat, that doesn’t mean there aren’t issues. One of my issues with the entire murder subject is the way opinions are substituted for fact of any sort. For example, while Kurt Cobain’s hatred of the media is well-documented, this book is happy to credit that he had revealed to one writer, David Fricke , that in late 1993 Cobain was as happy as happy could be. There’s a raft of similar quotations in here to support the idea that Cobain wasn’t sad or depressed and/or that he feared for his life, yet it all adds up to the kinds of statements that surround the average murder event, the kinds of things people say about the neighbour with imprisoned children in the backyard or the child who shoots their classmates; “oh, he was such a quiet boy, I would never have thought they could do it…” It’s life run by external spectators believing they have an absolute insight into the inner world of an individual and that their brief personal experiences sum up the whole of what someone is or isn’t.

The schizophrenia in the Halperin/Wallace books is undimmed with them trying to simultaneously acknowledge Cobain was troubled, while saying he was untroubled, saying he was happy while admitting he was a major drug addict, saying he was positive about life while saying he was terrified for his life and of/for his wife — it all depends which page you’re on. The authors ignore clear statements from Dave Grohl, Krist Novoselic, Pat Smear and others in the year since Cobain’s death that they knew he was genuinely troubled at the time and focus on those saying he wasn’t. On one page they even quote Mark Lanegan saying “I never knew Kurt to be suicidal, I just knew that he was going through a really tough time” as if that doesn’t clearly refute their statements about how happy he supposedly was. The way they do it is to try and argue that it’s possible to see, in advance, that someone is suicidal; that there’s some dividing line between depressed, miserable, enduring a hard time versus about to kill oneself.

The authors compound previous literary tricks in this volume. A primary one all the way through is deviating from a subject where they’re on weak ground to a concrete quotation or statement about an unrelated topic — it provides the initial topic with an unwarranted gloss of credibility. Trying to be positive about what they’ve done here though, their volume does make a much more substantial case for the unsavoury and untrustworthy nature of Courtney Love — but no more than fair observance of her shape-shifting and odd behaviour over the years has yielded for most observers. There’s still no case for murder in the behaviour or evidence they provide. It’s a tale in which the only people given credence are those the authors feel are supporting their case; some individuals are only permitted credibility for that brief time. Mr. Grant, on the other hand, gets away with comments that at this distance look feeble such as “I can’t go into too many details about what I learned when I arrived that morning…Some of the details will be very important for the prosecutor who eventually tries this case and I don’t want to tip my hand too early.” Twenty years…Twenty years…Permit me to dub thee “liar.”

Remember also that this isn’t just the tale of one murder; by the end of the book the implication is that Love is involved in the deaths of El Duce, of a police officer and of Kristen Pfaff on top of her husband. Her accomplices are the medical examiner, to the investigating officers (the entire murder squad and chain of command are, its implied, also incompetent or corrupt and only one guy who stopped being a police officer at age 29 after he ‘burned out’ over twenty years before these events has the truth), to the Cobain’s nanny, to Eric Erlandson, to Dylan Carlson — it’s a full blown conspiracy hooking in all and sundry. Everyone is lying or hiding the truth including the Cobain’s attorney who is apparently hiding the mystical ‘truth’ whereas is seems more likely she might have worked out Mr. Grant was nuts and was the kind of untrustworthy and paranoid character who was taping every conversation with anyone he spoke to.

The selectiveness continues; only the evidence that supports their case is allowed to stand whether that regards the crime scene, the autopsy, the events surrounding the discovery of Cobain’s body — it’s a serve-yourself buffet in which they pick-and-choose which bits of what anyone says are fact and whether people are talking rubbish. For example, while claiming that the autopsy reports have been unavailable and crucially prevent Mr. Grant making his case, they simultaneously state that the autopsy reports were leaked. This is important because they credit this leak with revealing, definitively, Cobain’s blood morphine level then make an unfounded assumption that these results would have meant nothing to the medical examiner and a further assumption that not one of the professionals conducting the toxicology tests would say anything about what their tests meant. They hang their strongest evidence on several assumptions and a contradiction. That’s where the blood heroin piece falls; no matter how many opinions one gathers around a potentially fictitious number, the number is still unproven.

Let’s take it at face value though. This piece did give me pause; heroin, if injected direct into the blood stream should, in most cases, act almost immediately and in the quantity claimed is lethal. The difficulty is, however, that, beyond the absence of evidence that they had the correct amount, there’s also a lack of scientific evidence related to tolerance levels among heroin addicts — it’s pretty hard to measure dosages in a sufficient number of people and see if it kills them. A study is cited featuring only 189 fatal self-poisonings with opiates and yet the authors don’t recognise the oddity they create; they argue that one of those people had a level as high as Cobain’s which, contrary to their argument, is proof that someone could have a level that high and that levels do fluctuate between individuals. The book has already pointed out that quite a number of addicts have developed high tolerance and can continue functioning for quite a while after injecting — again, there’s no evidence revealing the tolerance levels of Kurt Cobain so the argument is only made by statements related to non-millionaire addicts.

The authors deviate from their central thread in a bamboozling array of pseudo-science that may/may not be relevant. They claim one study shows no one committed suicide with opiates in north-west London for twenty years which, again, doesn’t hinder the argument that Cobain did self-anaesthetise before shooting himself, the cited study in fact puts Kurt into the 20% who died of physical injury. They cite another study regarding likelihood of suicide among missing persons; again, the stat that only 1 in 2000 missing persons’ cases end in suicide isn’t particularly useful because it proves that a number do. Furthermore, showing that an event (suicide) that only happens to a tiny minority of people only happens to a tiny minority of people is irrelevant to this case. I can’t tell if this is a deliberate attempt to throw numbers at the audience because of a belief that the audience isn’t statistically literate or if it’s because the authors aren’t able to decipher the numbers themselves. The authors rapidly abandon the attempt to add science to disproving the suicide verdict and retreat back to unrelated comparisons and personal anecdote where they’re more comfy.

Pages 98 to 104 briefly describe the intriguing phenomenon of staged suicides; great stuff and genuinely the discussion fascinated me. In terms of the Kurt Cobain case though it simply proves to be further smoke and mirrors; the authors mash six separate sources together, citing not particularly relevant or connected information from two books, then, in contrast to the Cobain case, they dwell on cases where there was very clear evidence at crime scene to show that homicide was a strong possibility. They often slip entirely into being misleading, for example, the statement on page 100 “the typical homicide victim — a man between 25 and 34 killed at home with a gun — fits a profile eerily similar to Cobain’s” is utterly devoid of meaning; firstly, finding that he’s the right age to be killed doesn’t prove he was but also males in that age range are also more likely to commit suicide too. There’s no reward for soundly identifying Cobain as a 27 year old male. There’d be more reward if it supported or refuted that he killed himself but it doesn’t.

Note that this post is one of four linked articles on the topic:



  1. Andrea Dalziel says:

    Funnily enough reading your last post, on this topic/authors, I actually didn’t realise you was talking about the first book,(which I’ve NOT read), but the second which I do own & have obviously read!!
    Kinda point proved on the topic of a rehash of the first one ?
    If you go into the book with preconcieved ideas that Kurt was murdered “via” Love, then yes it’s so very easy to overlook the concrete facts & latch onto what you want to believe & take away from reading it…..great Stuff Nick!! Keep it up Andy x

    • nsoulsby says:

      Alas! You’ve reminded me Andy that half the trouble is that I know I had/have preconceived ideas about the whole topic too so when I reread what I’ve written here I can see my writing style is influenced by my annoyance at bits of it!

      …But I will say that since our chats last year/earlier this year I’ve definitely become far less forgiving of Madame Love – sheesh, just not on the list of the world’s nicest people… Then again, hearing her dad speak made me think “darn, I’d be messed up if this is what my dad was like to me…” 🙂

      Stay good over there Andy! You rock!

  2. coen says:

    Hi Sappy! This is just another Spaniard 🙂 Hi Nick as well!
    Well, I mjust admit I purchased that book back in 2004 when I was living in Britain. Never really been a conspiracy-buyer, but I thought I might take a look. As you perfectly pointed, Nick, the selectiveness is so embarrassing. I mean, Kristen?? Those are very serious accusations, for god’s sake. First off, no one from the Nirvana camp (that is, Krist, Dave or Pat) EVER said anything in the lines of ‘Courtney had him killed’ or stuff. And yeah, they do have the right and there have been many chance to state such a proclaim in times of tension, but the thing is everyone who was really there seemed to accept that Kurt took his own life. Period. Who are we to debate that?
    I love Hole (mmmm the former band, for sure) and always cracked a smile whenever I came across with comments like “She’s a bitch who murdered him” and so. I find it pretty naive and simple. It’s obvious, as Nick stated, that Courtney is not the nicest person on earth – and definitely, not the most reliable. Her constant lies have done no good to her, but hey, wasn’t Kurt a liar himself? He exaggerated his own life in order to build a little mythology around him (that’s Charles Cross’ theory and it’s proven). Nonetheless, his word is taken as sacred for many.
    Some people simply don’t understand that you can be in real trouble, no matter how rich you are. It’s okay if they’d rather stay alive and enjoy their money. I’m not even implying Kurt Cobain was suicidal his whole life. You and I happen to have good times and bad times. Sometimes we might be overjoyed and the minute later we might feel as shit. But hey, that’s the way life is. Kurt, being so sensitive or whatever you might want to think of him, was just a person. In the end of his days he felt miserable. He escaped rehab and flew back to Seattle to keep scoring drugs. He hung out with another junkies, just like him. He never phoned Courtney, but he never tried to talk to his own daughter, either. He was not perfect, If his life was falling apart and he chose to put an end to it, fine. It’s not my life. I will not jugde. But let’s stop blaming Courtney or whoever because it was him who made the choice. He chose to be alone and isolated those very last days. He never thought of visiting Frances or trying to put his hit back together. instead, he bought a gun and did hat he did. He was not writing music any more, as Nick many times remind us. He felt like shit for many different reasons and I have to respect what he did. He was a genius, right, but in the first place he was a person. And life, as we all know, can be very hard at times.
    Enough 🙂
    Have a nice day, everyone!

    Un saludito, Sappy! 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s