Pete's reaction to Cincinnati

[Beau McCrury <Beau.McCrury@ucop.edu>]

Hi everyone,
I'm not a regular poster but monitor the list faithfully
and wanted to weigh in a bit on Pete's reaction to
the Cincinnati incident. 

I got the impression I believe from reading Dave Marsh's 
book 'Before I Get Old' that due to an interview that 
Pete gave, the legal entanglements that followed the 
Cinncinatti incident were complicated and drawn out. 
That is to say if Pete didn't say anything, legally 
speaking he would have made it easier on himself and 
the entire Who organization.  I assume that very 
interview is what Brian originally posted and was 
once again cited in the last digest #154.

If what I mention above is true then I can see that once
the reaction to Pete's interview was in, that Pete was 
probably legally advised to keep his trap shut.  And I 
think it would follow that we wouldn't have gotten some
musical interpretation of the incident from any member
of The Who because it could be adverse to there legal
interests.

Practically speaking, I wouldn't want to make things worse
by having comments, interviews, songs or other such 
expressions being misinterpreted.  I'll bet it was just too
hot to handle and the entire Who organization just decided
to leave it alone.  I don't think they would want to make it
legally worse on themselves.

By the way, does anyone know what the outcome of the various
law suits were?  What did they settle on?  How much did it
cost The Who, promoters, venue operators, etc.?

And while I'm here, to all of you who make this list happen,
THANX!  I love reading all of your posts.  It's nice to know 
I'm not the only Who freak out there.

Beau 'The Quiet One' McCrury