Miller/EIN Interview Commentary, Moody "Blue"

Also posted on EIN are responses to the Miller interview, and responses to other posts submitted to EIN. Below I will address the three responses submitted by “Blue,” who is a close friend of Miller’s.

“Blue”: Marty It's just amazing how you claim to be with Elvis 24 / 7 considering you where not around much after 1968, I know for a fact that when I meet Elvis you were not there.

PL: “Blue” (whose name we will get to later) stated to me on the phone in November, 2001, that she met Elvis in Tahoe in November, 1973. Elvis did not play Tahoe in November, 1973. So, when and where “Blue” claims to have met Elvis, Elvis wasn’t there.

“Blue” (continued): You [Marty Lacker] have repeatedly slammed Elvis and Priscilla Presley on national TV after claiming that you were Elvis's best friend. Best friends don't do that to there best friends. Now you are slamming Billy Miller and I am supposed to believe you? I talked to Elvis about Billy Miller, and he said that Billy was there. So I can't see why Elvis would lie about something like that. Elvis wanted me to meet Billy Miller back in 1971 and through 1973 then we lost touch for a while.

PL: Again, “Blue” told me she met Elvis in Tahoe, in November, 1973. Elvis wasn’t in Tahoe in November, 1973. So, obviously, Elvis couldn’t have told her anything about Miller, Marty Lacker, or anyone else. The statement that Elvis “wanted me to meet Billy Miller back in 1971” is very intriguing because “Blue” herself states that she met Elvis in 1973. So, Elvis could not have wanted “Blue” to meet Miller in 1971 because, by her own admission, “Blue” hadn’t met Elvis in 1971.

“Blue” (continued): So please Marty stop the lies are you just siding up with the other MM because you were not there? Yes, Billy was attacked and left for dead, and Billy has never said who? Further more Billy has never said a negative word about you. So what is a matter Marty, afraid of what Billy could say about you? He does not want negativity about you or any one else. This is his book on Elvis and law enforcement not about you or the MM so get off your high horse. Because you are acting like the back end of the horse.

You said that you have talked with all the guys meaning the MM and no one remembers Billy ever being there, I would believe that it is true, I don't know how you or any of the MM could remember the past. The pills were being passed like MM's candy, this can be proved. You can take that to the bank.

PL: Not that Marty Lacker wants or needs me to defend him or the Memphis Mafia, but claiming that Lacker’s statements referring to this time period must be discounted because of drug use would invalidate everything he says, and would further invalidate thousands of statements from other members of the Memphis Mafia, as well. If Marty Lacker had a drug problem back then, so be it, but his and others’ statements cannot be summarily dismissed as “Blue” would like us to believe.

Also, let’s take a closer look at the claims by “Blue” regarding the content of Miller’s book. She states that Miller does not want any negativity, and that his book is about Elvis and law enforcement. Yet, keep in mind that Miller has promised a “tell-all” book, one that will surprise people, and reveal secrets. In the EIN interview, Miller stated:

“For me it was a case of either stay in the truck or go hide from tree to tree and watch what was going on. I thought this was so neat, hiding from the guys watching what was going on and then reporting it back to Elvis. Boy do I have some stories to tell....and they will all be in my book.”

So, doesn’t this tell us that Miller will be telling these stories, which would be based on his spying endeavors around Graceland? And planting the wireless microphones? The answer is “yes.” Therefore, it seems reasonable that at least part of Miller’s book *is* about the Memphis Mafia.

Finally, Miller calls Mary Lacker, “one hell of a man,” while he allows his surrogate, “Blue,” to call Lacker a liar, a drug addict who cannot remember anything from “the past,” an egomaniac, and to top it all off, a horse’s ass. Miller and “Blue” should get their statements lined up a bit better, because it’s extremely disingenuous for Miller to allow his close friend and representative to talk this way about Lacker in a public forum.

NOTE: “Blue” suggests that Marty Lacker cannot be trusted to tell the truth because he was using drugs back then. Elvis was also using drugs in 1973, so, using “Blue’s” rationale, why should we believe Elvis was telling the truth when he said something to “Blue” about Billy Miller? Why does “Blue” feel Elvis is a credible source, even though he was using drugs, while Lacker is not a credible source?

“Blue” (continued): So lets see what the book has to say. You have stated your piece of mind and now I want to hear from Billy. The last time I checked we are in America, land of the free. Freedom of speech and the freedom of choice. You have chosen one road and Billy has chosen to set the record straight. I do know for a fact that Billy has spoken to me about you Marty, admired you when you were drawing and designing Elvis's jumpsuits, that Billy was so inspired by your drawings that he talked to his Dad about signing him up for art school. So I know for a fact that Billy Miller admired you then and looked up to you. That is how Billy is, a true friend and friend for life. So you keep slamming Billy all you want, Billy will still turn the other cheek.

PL: I find it interesting that “Blue” talks as though she doesn’t know Miller’s story, and that she is simply waiting to “see what the book has to say.” In fact, “Blue” is a very close friend of Miller’s, and knows good and well everything about Miller and his story. And, as noted below, she is apparently authorized to speak in a public forum on Miller’s behalf. More on this later.

Also, “Blue” says Miller will turn the other cheek. Is that what “Blue” is doing? No. Miller cannot claim to turn the other cheek when he sends his attack dog out to take cheap shots at Marty Lacker and the Memphis Mafia.

NOTE: Re: the term “slamming”: In the last comment posted from the Miller/EIN interview, Miller states that “everyone else just slammed me.” We are under the assumption that Billy Miller personally submitted his part of the interview to EIN, and that these are his words. In the comment above submitted by “Blue,” we see the comment, “So you keep slamming Billy all you want…” In an earlier submission, also included above, “Blue” writes, “You have repeatedly slammed Elvis and Priscilla Presley on national TV…” It is interesting that both Billy Miller and “Blue” use the term “slam” (and variations thereof), and yet we are to believe that the written part of the interview was submitted to EIN by Billy Miller, and these responses to posts were submitted to EIN by “Blue.”

“Blue” (on behalf of Billy Miller): Billy has never asked Jimmy Velvet to endorse his book or any one else. Billy has been friends with Jimmy for many years. We are going back to the 50's and the 60's. I am sorry if people think that Jimmy was part of this book which he is not, so I am going to set the record straight. There are maybe 10 pictures in the whole world of Billy Miller that I know of and I have 7 of them. You asked for a picture of him and I sent it to you. Billy is very upset over this because his friendship with Jimmy means so much. As I said, when writing to Marty, Billy does not want anyone to get hurt over this, not people he cares about. Jimmy is a very kind and loving person like he has always been, and Billy wants it to stay that way.

PL: “Blue” had to have known that a photo of Miller with Jimmy Velvet could be construed as circumstantial evidence of a connection between Miller and Velvet in the readers’ minds, which would possibly lend credence to Miller’s claims. That is, credibility through association. More on these claims later.