Judge John Weeks dead (April 2021)


Excerpt:

His Honour John Weeks QC​

It is with much regret that we report that Master Weeks (His Honour John Weeks QC) sadly died on the Easter weekend, aged 82. The Inn’s flag will fly at half-mast on Monday 19 April 2021, in his memory.

Master Weeks was called to the Bar in 1963 and took Silk in 1983. In 1991 he was appointed a circuit judge on the Western Circuit and as a Chancery Circuit judge in 1997 until his retirement in 2006.

He was elected a Judicial Governing Bencher in 1996.

Details of any funeral and/or memorial service will be circulated as appropriate in due course.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

gordyboy9

Game Of Death.
im sure M wont be revelling in the death of an old man,especially after what happened to his mam,as you get older its easier to come to terms with what happened in the past.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
im sure M wont be revelling in the death of an old man,especially after what happened to his mam,as you get older its easier to come to terms with what happened in the past.
You must be joking- this is Morrissey we're talking about- he'll be having a victory wank tonight.
 

DreamingofStew

Active Member
Devious, truculent and unreliable…

for what exactly? He and Marr DID deserve more than split 4 ways equal royalties

I’ve never understood how Mike and Andy thought they deserve equal share of Smiths money

how could a judge think they do ? Other than being clueless
View attachment 73258 View attachment 73259

I wasn't there at the court case, so this is not authoritative, but the fact is there are two sets of royalties with music: writing and performance. Mike and Andy never sued for writing royalties, but for performance royalties, of which they clearly deserved an equal share (or more than equal on instrumentals such as 'Oscillate Wildly').

I'm happy to be corrected on this.
 
Last edited:
A

Anonymous

Guest
First of all, when the band started, Johnny, Mike and Andy were only 18 years old. Both Johnny and Morrissey have said they laid out what the split was early on in the band. Mike is a liar. He knew the split and he even asked Morrissey during the course of the band to take on more responsibility in the band for a larger percentage - Morrissey told him no, he could leave the band, but he stayed. This is in Morrissey's book.

In Johnny's book, he says Morrissey made him tell the others about their 10% status and said he would leave the band unless they accepted the deal. Andy and Mike accepted the deal. It was not in writing, mainly because Morrissey kept firing all the managers. That was the only reason Mike won the case, it was not in writing. It doesn't matter who did what in the band. On a purely legal basis, Mike's side prevailed. Mike had to have a bad case of amnesia, but for a million pounds, he did it. I don't blame Morrissey and Marr for never speaking to him again.
Great post! Johnny Marr is speaking the truth in his book about this situation. "Following the Mozziah" Blog also had a good article about it.

That is true Andy Rourke and Mike Joyce were about 17 or 18 when they first joined The Smiths. Mike Joyce is dishonest I don't trust him.

Morrissey is the oldest member of The Smiths born in 1959. Mike Joyce was born in 1963. Andy Rourke was born in 1964. They seemed to see Morrissey as a sort of Daddy figure a father figure who once he started making money they thought would provide for them financially for life.
 

SheilaSmith

Active Member
less.jpg
 

DreamingofStew

Active Member
Also, if this is a crowing over the judge's death, this kind of thing is ridiculous. It's not as if human mortality is a game that one of us will eventually 'win'.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I wasn't there at the court case, so this is not authoritative, but the fact is there are two sets of royalties with music: writing and performance. Mike and Andy never sued for writing royalties, but for performance royalties, of which they clearly deserved an equal share (or more than equal on instrumentals such as 'Oscillate Wildly').

I'm happy to be corrected on this.

But it's also ludicrous that Marr gets a songwriting royalty and Rourke doesn't. What was Marr's contribution to the songs? He didn't coin the vocal melodies. He didn't write the lyrics. So that just leaves the music. In many Smiths songs, Rourke's bass line is at least as distinctive a melodic element of the song as are Marr's guitar parts - and clearly Marr's layered guitar harmonies must have been created after, and in response to, the melodic bass line and the vocal melody. Apart from a really obvious example like 'Barbarism Begins At Home', take a song like 'The Hand That Rocks the Cradle'. But in virtually every Smiths song, the bass is as important a melodic element as the guitars, and I don't believe Marr 'wrote' Andy's bass parts. What it all boils down to, as I've argued before, is that the 'songs' were really Morrissey's alone, as he created the vocal melodies and lyrics, which are what the song is. You can strip away the backing music from a song, and just sing the lyric and it's still the song. And on the other hand, Rourke's input to the backing music was generally as significant as Marr's. So the credits should have been 'Songs by Morrissey' , music by Marr/Rourke and the royalties divided somehow along those lines. Perhaps Joyce would then have been happy with sop of being given a music writing credit for his famous drum opening to 'The Queen Is Dead'.
 

DreamingofStew

Active Member
But it's also ludicrous that Marr gets a songwriting royalty and Rourke doesn't. What was Marr's contribution to the songs? He didn't coin the vocal melodies. He didn't write the lyrics. So that just leaves the music. In many Smiths songs, Rourke's bass line is at least as distinctive a melodic element of the song as are Marr's guitar parts - and clearly Marr's layered guitar harmonies must have been created after, and in response to, the melodic bass line and the vocal melody. Apart from a really obvious example like 'Barbarism Begins At Home', take a song like 'The Hand That Rocks the Cradle'. But in virtually every Smiths song, the bass is as important a melodic element as the guitars, and I don't believe Marr 'wrote' Andy's bass parts. What it all boils down to, as I've argued before, is that the 'songs' were really Morrissey's alone, as he created the vocal melodies and lyrics, which are what the song is. You can strip away the backing music from a song, and just sing the lyric and it's still the song. And on the other hand, Rourke's input to the backing music was generally as significant as Marr's. So the credits should have been 'Songs by Morrissey' , music by Marr/Rourke and the royalties divided somehow along those lines. Perhaps Joyce would then have been happy with sop of being given a music writing credit for his famous drum opening to 'The Queen Is Dead'.

As I understand it, the guitar generally came first and Morrissey came up with a vocal melody to fit the guitar. This is something I get from various interviews. Again, I'm ready to be corrected.

I take the point about Andy's bass parts, but I'm not sure they got no writing royalties (maybe they didn't). They certainly didn't get as large a cut of the writing royalties as the other two, but I don't think they ever disputed the writing royalties.
 
V

Vegan Cro Spirit .777

Guest
FFS Moz wrote all the drum/bass parts via his vocal melodies:lbf: they just refuse to find jobs:blushing:
bon voyage to the old goat:hammer:
 
T

Trans

Guest
As I understand it, the guitar generally came first and Morrissey came up with a vocal melody to fit the guitar. This is something I get from various interviews. Again, I'm ready to be corrected.

I take the point about Andy's bass parts, but I'm not sure they got no writing royalties (maybe they didn't). They certainly didn't get as large a cut of the writing royalties as the other two, but I don't think they ever disputed the writing royalties.

yeah the guitar probably did come first but not as we heard it on album. Andy wrote a bass part to some songs based around a basic chord progression sometimes and the bass part he came up with is sometimes the more melodic part of the song and often the part that people hum and remember. Ruffians is an example perhaps. Money and arguments about credit aside I’m not sure they could have replaced Andy very easily and still sound the same. Marr can write a fantastic riff and knows his stuff but Andy really brought some very catchy parts to the table
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
As I understand it, the guitar generally came first and Morrissey came up with a vocal melody to fit the guitar. This is something I get from various interviews. Again, I'm ready to be corrected.

I think Marr always the impression that the backing music was presented to Morrissey as a fait accompli but I don't think it was that straightforward. I think what Marr gave Morrissey was probably a generally fairly straightforward rhythm guitar track with maybe one or two melodic lead guitar lines on top. The layered harmonies would have been added after they Morrissey's vocal melody to counterpoint and work around.

Bur let's say that the backing tracks to, say, 'William, It Was Really Nothing' or 'The Headmaster Ritual' were presented to Morrissey as we hear them on the record. In that case. Rourke's bass was a part of the music that inspired Morrissey's vocal melody. And often his bass was the most distinctive melodic element of the music.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I take the point about Andy's bass parts, but I'm not sure they got no writing royalties (maybe they didn't). They certainly didn't get as large a cut of the writing royalties as the other two, but I don't think they ever disputed the writing royalties.

I don't see how they could have got writing royalties, as the songs were credited to Morrissey/Marr. That's my point really, I'm surprised Andy never contested this. Craig Gannon certainly did, and probably with less justification.
 
D

Deleted member 29235

Guest
What it all boils down to, as I've argued before, is that the 'songs' were really Morrissey's alone, as he created the vocal melodies and lyrics, which are what the song is.

Absolute horse brass. Pretty much every song that The Smiths recorded started out as a demo written by Marr. The harmonic progressions and song structures were written by Marr, recorded to tape, then given to Morrissey who wrote a vocal line and words. Marr then essentially arranged the song in the studio, writing the individual tracks (bass and drums excepted although he may well have given pointers to Rourke and Joyce as to what he wanted.)
To claim that the songs "were really Morrissey's alone" shows a lack of understanding of how a song is written in general, and how Morrissey and Marr worked in particular, which is a matter of public record.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Anonymous

Guest
Absolute horse shit. Pretty much every song that The Smiths recorded started out as a demo written by Marr. The harmonic progressions and song structures were written by Marr, recorded to tape, then given to Morrissey who wrote a vocal line and words. Marr then essentially arranged the song in the studio, writing the individual tracks (bass and drums excepted although he may well have given pointers to Rourke and Joyce as to what he wanted.)
To claim that the songs "were really Morrissey's alone" shows a lack of understanding of how a song is written in general, and how Morrissey and Marr worked in particular, which is a matter of public record.

Interesting that nothing you say here actually contradicts my posts. I'm aware that Marr put harmonic progressions and structures onto tapes for Morrissey - that's pretty much what I said - and that Morrissey, as you say, and as I said, then wrote a vocal line and words. We both agree that Marr then added stuff in the studio and that neither of us know if he gave pointers to Rourke (but I'll lay odds he didn't - you only have to listen to the intricacy and idiosyncratic quality of those bass lines to realise that).

So what's your point exactly?

Ah yes, you think this demonstrates that the songs were 'co-written'. They weren't. They were created when Morrissey, as you say, put down his vocal line and words. 'Bigmouth Strikes Again' is 'Bigmouth Strikes Again' because of the vocal melody and words. Give the same backing track to a different lyricist/vocalist (even assuming the backing track was in its finished state which, as you yourself acknowledge, it probably wasn't) and you'd have a completely different song.

"a lack of understanding of how a song is written in general" is a fatuous remark since songs are written/created in various ways, not according to some 'industry standard'. Lennon and McCartney co-wrote some songs sitting face to face with their guitars in hand. Sometimes they pieced together individual parts they'd already written. Elton John put music and vocal melodies to Bernie Taupin's lyrics. Some songwriters read music and literally 'write' music; most don't and the term song'writing' in reference to anything other than the lyrics is therefore in those cases not literal. Morrissey didn't 'write' his vocal melodies, and Marr didn't 'write' his music.

The public record you're referring to is presumably Marr's account, and Morrissey's, of how the songs were created. Nobody's disputing that what they say is true in so far as it goes - yes, Marr recorded backing tracks and gave them to Morrissey. What's in dispute is whether he deserved a songwriting co-credit for that (he didn't) and whether Rourke ought to have a had a co-writing music compositional credit for the finished backing tracks (he should have).

To simply accept Marr's and Morrissey's accounts at face value is being a little credulous and displays a lack of understanding of how songs are 'written' in general.

In other words, your argument is horse shit.
 

BookishBoy

Well-Known Member
I'm fairly sure it was Judge Weeks' final wish on his deathbed that his passing would inspire such a fevered debate as to who exactly wrote what, with regard to The Smiths.
 
Top Bottom