|A recent image of the Lake Washington, Seattle estate.|
Tuesday, July 7, 2015
PART 1 - April 2, 1994: Why the Sighting of Kurt Cobain on this Date Matters
On the morning of Saturday, April 2, 1994, the day prior to Courtney Love hiring Tom Grant, Kurt Cobain is understood to have been observed at his Lake Washington, Seattle home by Michael "Cali" Dewitt. Dewitt was a live-in nanny to Frances Bean and a former boyfriend of Courtney Love's. As explained in Tom Grant's Case Study Manual, Dewitt revealed to Grant that he observed Cobain on the morning of April 2. This sighting has been reported by other sources, including some seemingly loyal to Courtney Love, and is also recounted near the end of Soaked In Bleach. It is additionally referenced in a statement given by Dewitt to the Seattle Police Department, dated April 18, 1994, which reads: "He does not know where Kurt was after the Sat morning when he awoke to find Kurt sitting on his bed."
Most significantly, however, Courtney Love is understood to have been made aware of this sighting on the very day it occurred. This is indicated, in part, by call records, which, as illustrated in Soaked In Bleach, show Dewitt and Love spoke to each other "eight times on April 2," and by Dewitt's own remarkable acknowledgment to Tom Grant, as explained in his Case Study Manual, that he informed Love on April 2 of this sighting. The call records evidence as well as this admission by Dewitt in the CSM are confirmed in the major investigative work by Max Wallace and Ian Halperin, who had access to some of Tom Grant's clandestine recordings of case participants.
Given this evidence indicating that Love was aware of Dewitt's April 2 sighting of Cobain at the Seattle estate, what possible justification is there for why she withheld this information from Tom Grant the next day, on April 3? What reason is there to not inform the private investigator she had just hired to locate her husband, to whom she claimed was missing and suicidal and in possession of a shotgun, that she in fact was told of the precise location where he had been observed? This inconsistency is particularly troubling and it most certainly bolsters the contention that Love's true motives in hiring Tom Grant were not legitimate, but rather intended to create the false impression of care and diligence with regard to the whereabouts of her husband.
But even more shocking perhaps is the fact that the Missing Persons Report Love filed with the Seattle Police Department on April 4 - under the false name of Kurt Cobain's mother, Wendy O'Connor, as revealed in a recording by Grant - does not disclose the sighting of Cobain by Dewitt two days earlier. Given Love's contention that Cobain was missing and suicidal, what possible reason explains the non-disclosure of this absolutely critical piece of information in the Missing Persons Report? This inconsistency, like the one involving Grant the day prior, is again very troubling and is directly relevant with regard to what Love's true motivations were when filing this report with the Seattle Police Department. More specifically, the nature of this report - touched upon only briefly in this article - goes directly to questions bearing on the creation of a false "suicide trail," wherein law enforcement are led astray with regard to the true nature of certain events.
In addition, it's important to look at occurrences relating to this April 2 sighting of Kurt Cobain in context with other evidence in the case: taken in conjunction, for instance, with the various crime scene irregularities, Cobain's astronomical blood-morphine concentration (a triple lethal dose), and a large number of other suspicious occurrences involving Ms. Love - who also had clear motive based on a looming divorce and removal from Cobain's will - the significance of events relating to the April 2 sighting become very revealing.
In conclusion, Dewitt's observation of Kurt Cobain on Saturday, April 2, and the disturbing non-disclosures that followed, are extremely valuable evidentiary occurrences that will, naturally, be very important points of inquiry for any new law enforcement team that re-opens the case.