Re: THE "EXISTENCE" OF TOM HILL: A CASE FOR OPEN DEBATE

From: Hiram Gonash <okfreddy_at_hotmail.com_at_hypermail.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 15:27:54 -0000

That wasn't Tom but his understudy. What was the name of that fluffer?

Danny...no...Glenn....no....John....

--- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, Joy McCann
<jmmccann_at_s...> wrote:
> This whole thing could be solved with some footage from that New Year's
> trip: 1979-1980. I could SWEAR Tom's in that. But it's probably not a
> film that should be shown in front of kids. Or wives . . . . am I
> making myself clear?
>
> --J
Received on 2005-02-09 07:27:58