The shot is one of a series of pictures — some never seen before — that show the legendary Beatle in New York during his last ever interview on December 6, 1980.

He was shot dead by a crazed fan just TWO days later.

The photos show him alongside his wife Yoko Ono and with top Radio One DJ Andy Peebles who was interviewing him.



Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3195764/Last-ever-snap-of-Lennon-revealed.html#ixzz13R0OJKef

Definitely not the last picture. There were quite a few pictures taken on the morning of December 8th by Annie Leibovitz, including the infamous January, 1981 cover of Rolling Stone Magazine, and some home shots that wound up on the 1982 compilation The John Lennon Collection, including the album cover itself.

There's also a famous shot of John Lennon signing an autograph for Mark David Chapman a few hours before the murder.

There's also a famous shot of John Lennon signing an autograph for Mark David Chapman a few hours before the murder.

That was the first thing I thought of when I clicked on this.

I always thought that picture of John Lennon autographing his killer's record was the last picture of him alive ever taken. And unless the person's first name is Roger, Stephen Curtis, or Tracy, there is to be no mention of anyone named Chapman on this music board! Lennon's killer is to be referred to as The Man Whose Name We Must Never Mention!

That picture was taken by a New Jersey photographer named Paul Goresh. He wanted to get an autograph from Lennon after his return from the recording studio but he decided it was late and he should go home. "I'd wait," The Man Whose Name We Must Never Mention said to him. "You never know if you're going to see him again."

If Paul Goresh had waited, he conceivably could have stopped The Man Whose Name We Must Never Mention by tackling him to the ground.

Exactly - no Beatles/Lennon fan speaks that name, a major reason being that he has never, ever shown remorse or apologized (to my knowledge) in almost 30 years. If on the very slim chance he gets parole - he won't last long with millions of angry fans waiting. Why do you think he's in solitary now?

Eh. I'm a huge Beatles/Lennon fan, but I have no problem using Mark David Chapman's name. When I was younger, I subscribed to the above school of thought, but now I think it's kind of silly to deify John Lennon by refusing to mention Chapman's name. Heck, I even heard Yoko refer to him by name in a recent interview on Anderson Cooper 360.

I've seen people on various music boards subscribing to the "He Who Shall Not Be Named Theory," threatening to blow his brains out if he ever gets released, and then go on in different posts about how Jim Gordon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Gordon_%28musician%29) of Derek and the Dominos (killed his mother with a hammer) should be released from prison.

Seriously, why not refuse to speak Jim Gordon's name? His crime was no less horrible than Chapman's.

Or Phil Spector? Why are we still allowed to use his name? One of the greatest musical geniuses of the past half century. Worked with John Lennon in the '70s. Killed a woman in the 2000s.

Refusing to use Mark David Chapman's name is silly, and only draws more attention to him; not less.

Exactly - no Beatles/Lennon fan speaks that name, a major reason being that he has never, ever shown remorse or apologized (to my knowledge) in almost 30 years. If on the very slim chance he gets parole - he won't last long with millions of angry fans waiting. Why do you think he's in solitary now?

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0009/30/lklw.00.html

I have regrets. I'm sorry for what I did. I realize now that I really ended a man's life. Then, he was an album cover to me. He didn't exist, even when I met him earlier that day when he signed the album for me, which he did very graciously. And he was not a phony, by the way. He was very patient, and he was very cordial and he asked me if there was anything else. So if that didn't register -- and I also met his son that day. If that didn't register that he was a human being, then I wasn't perceiving him as such. I just saw him as a two-dimensional celebrity with no real feelings.

It was me, Larry, and I accept full responsibility for what I did. I've seen places where I'm blaming the devil, and I hope that that isn't kept going after this interview. I'm not blaming the devil, I'm blaming myself. But in the major sense, it wasn't me, because I'm better now. I'm normal, I'm functioning, I have a lovely wife, and we have a great marriage -- as much as, you know, can be had from here, from Attica.

But I'm not the same person in the major sense, because back then I was lost and I didn't know who I was. But now I do.

Seriously, why not refuse to speak Jim Gordon's name? His crime was no less horrible than Chapman's.

Or Phil Spector? Why are we still allowed to use his name? One of the greatest musical geniuses of the past half century. Worked with John Lennon in the '70s. Killed a woman in the 2000s.

Refusing to use Mark David Chapman's name is silly, and only draws more attention to him; not less.


Those are two more names people would rather not mention. Does Clapton being up his old drummer? Doubtful.

Yoko (who is someone I respect and admire) seems to be the one who originated the "don't mention Chapman's name rule," but has since broken it.

Also, the liner notes from the reissues of John Lennon's Plastic Ono Band and Imagine from 2000 and 2010 don't say "Produced by he who shall not be mentioned," or "Drums: Jerks of All Jerks."

Just sayin'.

I understand the heart behind not mentioning his name, but I think avoiding it when referring to John Lennon's murder just gives the man (Chapman) more power. Me? I hold no ill-will against him. He obviously is/was a deeply disturbed individual. He has my pity and sympathy.