Larry Norman: The David Di Sabatino's Fallen Angel documentary

Sunday 28th March 2010

Mike Rimmer chronicles the turbulent history of a Jesus music icon, a go-for-the-jugular film maker and his own encounters with both



Continued from page 2

There are lots of people who would be quite worried that a Christian music artist is touring and yet engaging in a romantic and sexual relationship with one of his singers. Did she not have any qualms about that? How did she get into that position where she was performing gospel music but such things were going on behind the scenes? She responded, "Well, it was romantic but it certainly didn't become sexual straight away. No. That happened some months later, not when we were on the Australian tour. I don't know. . . that's a hard one to answer isn't it? When you really love someone. . . we were beginning a future together and we were unofficially engaged. He brought me a ring that I was wearing so we were planning a future and Larry had a way of putting things. Not that I'm putting the full blame on him. I still had a voice myself. But I had come from a pretty traumatic, abusive marriage and was quite prepared to trust that Larry knew best in this situation, and as we were engaged to be married I thought that it was okay. Which obviously it wasn't! But at the time love was quite blind."

In November 1988, Jennifer discovered that she was pregnant. Larry was still in Australia and at first, Jennifer said, Larry was "over the moon" at the news. But when Daniel was born, Larry's name was missing from the birth certificate. She explained, "Well, in Australia you can't do that. You can't just put someone's name on there without their consent. They have to sign the form to be a consenting parent." By the time of the birth, Larry was no longer in Australia. She remembered, "He visited once in February. He came out for a festival in Melbourne and he was out only for a week I think at that time. He said he'd be back before Daniel was born. We were planning where we were going to live and things like that. So part of that [visit] was for a festival and part of it was just planning our future."

But the planned future never materialised. She remembered, "He promised that we'd be married and that we would live in both countries but he kind of disappeared off the map for quite some time. Oh my goodness, I don't have a real record of all the wrongs but it was a continuum of probably 16 years of promises, not just that he made to me but probably more importantly, the promises that he made to his son that he broke and the damage that it did to Daniel. I was an adult and able to recover from broken promises a lot better than a child."

Didn't Jennifer have the opportunity for a DNA test while Larry was alive to settle the issue of paternity once and for all? Jennifer explained, "There wasn't any sort of reason to prove DNA. Larry had been in contact with Daniel for periods in Daniel's life. We have proof of letters and many emails and there was always that contact that he'd had with him. So there was no real reason for us to go searching for DNA because there was some form of relationship, however fractured it was. Larry had always promised us that even though he was not able to financially help us out throughout Daniel's life that he would be mentioned in the will. I thought that he would leave something to help Daniel on his way in life, as he'd promised. But that was just another broken promise that didn't happen either. So I spent Daniel's life believing Larry didn't have any money to help us and I guess I just believed that. I took him on his word. I wasn't able to fly over there and find out that he did own all these houses and all these cars and had his property and money put away somewhere. I wasn't really in that position. I was raising four children by myself and I just had the attitude that you trust someone until they prove they're untrustworthy. And this is someone that I loved very deeply."

Since Jennifer Wallace chose to go public about Daniel's parentage, she has found herself under fire from both Larry Norman fanatics and from Larry's family. In particular Charles Norman has consistently disputed the authenticity of Jennifer's claims. For her part Jennifer steadfastly maintains she has evidence from correspondence with Larry as well as plane tickets, passport stamps, etc. But what about the emotional damage done to Daniel through this very public scrutiny? "I tried to do it privately," Jennifer asserted. "That was the first thing I did when I heard that Larry had passed away; I tried to contact the Normans over and over and over again for some time privately. There was no response. So I started posting my letters on the internet, on Larry Norman's fan sites, saying here we were. Daniel was absolutely distraught that his father had died and we were just looking to be able to find some way to get to the funeral. After some period of time Charles actually phoned me and said, 'Stop. I'll listen to you but stop posting these posts.' So we actually had a conversation that I thought was quite civil for probably close to an hour, I think, that afternoon. I felt that we were dealing with things quite privately and I also spoke to Kristin, his wife."

She continued, "I was a little nervous on the phone because I'd never spoken to Larry's family during this entire time. It was 18 years almost. I said it was a 10-week tour of Russia or something. I tripped up on my facts; it was a 10-week tour that was INCLUSIVE of Russia. But for some reason Charles and Kristin decided to pull that apart and dissect it and she'd said I was not telling the truth. So yes, we definitely did try and do this privately as we've followed through and then we went to the pastors. And then we've gone public. We've done it in an order that we felt we had to do, but we have had to do something for Daniel's sake. Not for mine, but for Daniel's."

Despite the smokescreen from the family and loud protests from Norman fans and questions about the veracity of Jennifer's claims, there is one easy way for all of this to be proved one way or another. And that is through a DNA test.

Di Sabatino obviously believes that Jennifer's claims are beyond doubt. "The court in Portland, Oregon already adjudicated on this. But even beyond that you had people in Australia coming to the front and saying, 'Look, we've known for years that this kid was Larry's. We have email evidence. There are letters between Larry and Daniel. There are letters between Larry and Jennifer. There's a lot of evidence. There are pictures. There is a conversation that took place between members of the Larry Norman family before he passed away about this whole situation. There's a ton of evidence beyond that! If people are just going to sit there and say, 'This is all circumstantial', how many times do I have to say it before you just realise that you're just putting up a wall?"

But surely a DNA test is the most sensible thing that should be done. "Absolutely!" Di Sabatino agreed, "You know, there's another piece of evidence. If all of this is untrue and all of it is circumstantial, you want people to shut up? Do a DNA test! We would shut up in a second, right?" But what would happen to his film if a DNA test proved Jennifer's claim to be untrue? Di Sabatino explained, "I already emailed to Charles that if Daniel is not the son of Larry Norman I will take my movie away. That's how convinced I am that this is Larry's son. There's overwhelming evidence!"

But getting a DNA test has proved to be problematic. Jennifer maintained, "We've had several letters sent and we've had to find ourselves a lawyer in Salem, Oregon, that would carry through with our story to try and present the Normans a request for DNA. Several letters they have just chosen to ignore. We've now actually had to go a bit further and get a court order for them to present DNA. I'm not afraid to present DNA. I know that Larry is Daniel's father and that Daniel is definitely his son. There's no question of that. We were very much in love and planning a future and there was nobody else."

Her response led me to ask a delicate question, one which so enraged Di Sabatino that he subsequently broke off all contact with me. I asked Jennifer whether she was in any kind of sexual relationship with anybody else at the same time as her relationship with Larry. "No. Definitely not. No. He was my world; my absolute world." Off air after the programme I spoke to Jennifer at length and apologised for having to ask such an intrusive question. Jennifer graciously accepted the apology and the spirit in which it was asked. Sadly, as it later turned out, Mr Di Sabatino was less forgiving.

Randy Stonehill and Larry Norman
Randy Stonehill and Larry Norman

Jennifer still has hopes for the future. "I hope that we can go forward with the DNA and then make a public announcement that this is the case. And my hope is I guess for some sort of reconciliation with the Norman family on some level. That Daniel can be able to say that they're family, whether he chooses to move forward with any friendship with that family. But at least that can be a matter of choice. I would love it if they could embrace him and see how much like Larry he is and what a wonderful human being Daniel really is and allow that to just sort of bear some fruit in the future. I've not been able to deny that I've had the baby. Larry, for some reason, for whatever reason, went back and decided that he was going to deny this and not move forward with the future; deny it publicly but not deny it privately. There was still a level of, 'I'm waiting for you,' and things like that, that went on for years and years and years that of course the public don't know anything about."

As my live on air conversation with Di Sabatino continued, he became increasingly agitated that I had chosen to fire at him some of the questions that Larry Norman fans were asking. But overall, what was he hoping to achieve with Fallen Angel? "The same thing [as] with the Lonnie Frisbee film, that these are stories of biblical magnitude; that these are characters that God uses. I mean, look at the upside of this story; that here's a guy that even in spite of all this, God still used this guy. Now that doesn't justify him. This is what these people are doing; they're saying, 'But he brought all these people to the Lord!' 'But he did this!' 'He did this!' And therefore we're supposed to just wink at the other stuff. See, the problem is that we have poor theology that comes from Larry Norman fans; that comes from Larry himself; and these people have bought into it."

He continued, "It's unfortunate, Mike, that you're coming at this from the Larry Norman fan perspective because I think they are a vocal minority. I think the majority of people that see the movie are transfixed by it. They understand that lives are full of this stuff and yet God still is faithful to walk beside, even if you go through the valley of the shadow of death. Nobody can judge the heart of a man except God but here is a guy that God used, and yet these things are true too. This is a holistic story but you have to be able to embrace the nuances. People that can't of course are going to say, 'Oh, this is horrible!' I [can't accept that] it's horrible. These stories are in the Bible!"

Showing page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4


Reader Comments

Posted by Callum Beck in PEI, Canada @ 13:18 on Apr 19 2018

A fair and balanced presentation, imo. I met Dave in the early nineties, with another Norman fanatic. He was starting to question some of Larry's claims even then, and his questions seemed to have some substance. For me it was Larry's paranoia expressed in his lyrics and written comments that first made me question a lot of his claims. I loved the story line but realized he played around with the truth far too much. I met him about 2000 on PEI. He clearly loved the Lord and was an amazing evangelist and musician but he also had serious flaws which he unfortunately had trouble admitting. He needed some of Brendan Manning's and Rich Mullin's brutal honesty. Still love his music and have no doubt about his deep faith, but even if there may be another side to some of the accusations made in the documentary there also seems to be much of truth in it.



Posted by Nobody special @ 21:16 on Jan 6 2017

I'm a Larry Norman fan, who recognised he had a dark side. Ironically, the impact of the Di Sabatino film, combined with refuting material subsequently released by the Norman family, has been for me to see Larry in a more positive light.

You have to decide whether Di Sabatino was an unbiased investigator or a troublemaker with a camera and agenda. To me, this article places him in the latter camp. The most obvious question to Jennifer Lawrence is, are you sure Larry was the father? Could it have been another man? Far from going off the deep end when that question was asked, Di Sabatino should have asked it himself. Related is his willingness to make an entire film of accusations against Norman, yet get upset when tough questions are asked of him.

In the wake of all this the Norman family has released materials concerning Norman's divorce from Pamela and other matters. Anyone who sees the film should also consider these before making their minds up. Incredibly sad. http://www.thetruthaboutlarrynorman.com/shot-down/pam-newman /



Posted by Babs in Newton Le Willows @ 02:23 on Aug 9 2015

Phew! Those behind the Fallen Angel bore-fest had nothing good and true to say about Larry. Disgusting. Voices that could defend him remain silent. We will never divulge what he had to suffer in his harrowing dealings with them. But I know that I know that His Lord was for him more than any one of those folk could ever imagine. He knew that, too, therefore remained sweetly silent. Yay!!!@



Posted by Arlow Cain in Troy, Ohio @ 04:32 on Jan 20 2012

Ease up Christians. Either you love Truth or you don't.



Posted by Dave in UK @ 13:59 on Nov 30 2010

Difficult... Mike there is so much being said on both sides but there is at least one simple truth here. David Di Sabatino is the aggressor. Quoting King David is purely an excuse. What he is doing is not right even if he is correct. If a similar row was happening in our Church, instigated by an individual, they would need to either stop or quickly find another church. Maybe we all need to read the Gospels again.

Sometimes we justify attitudes in our media culture because we are not radical enough in our Christianity- perhaps that's why we're so anonymous. It is not cliche to say that if Jesus turned up and they asked him what he thought it would all be sorted out very quickly. He would not be interested in the sordid details. In fact anything of this nature breaks his heart. Perhaps he wasn't very involved in the production.

I suspect the challenge is that one of the privileges of being in the media is the right of free creative expression of different points of view, and yet we have killed part of our heart if we think that as Christians we have that right. James said the most difficult thing to tame is the tongue, with good reason, and we are not disciples unless we are willing to submit ourselves to that within an industry that will not.

David Di Sabatino, if he is a guy who cares at all about God more than success in the Christian sub-culture, will realise that he will have to give account and he's made a film which brings disrepute to God. Whether he's right is irrelevant. he may well be.

This is not a Larry Norman supporter berating an opponent. Please get the point. The Media has no God-given right to discuss publicly the sins of another any more than an individual. I'm not defending Larry, just saddened by the whole furore.

I suppose we need someone radical to come and shake things up a bit in the Christian Media...


Reply by MADA in Canada @ 12:34 on Mar 13 2014

Well said!

[report abuse]


Posted by Michael Lodahl in San Diego, CA @ 04:56 on Oct 13 2010

Thanks for the article. I've yet to locate a copy of "Fallen Angel" but would like to see it. I've been a lover of LN's music since I first heard a pirated tape back in 1972. But really, long before any of this stuff hit the fan, wasn't it obvious -- even just in his liner notes -- that Larry was capable of extensive self-promotion (no, self-aggrandizement) and rationalization? Everything was always someone else's fault. It became an awfully old tune. And yet I still love his music (esp. late 60s/early 70s) and admire his creativity. I felt he spent too much time and energy trying to present an image of infallibility -- even while his music could have gone so much deeper into human agony, sin, failure, etc.



Posted by Martin Hoerschelmann in Hamburg, Germany @ 01:15 on Sep 16 2010

Thank you for your side of the Larry Norman-story. Since the 80s I'm a fan of his music. But there allways remained a questionmark: Why did he say things like "I found out they were wrong"? (When they had said, he "slept around".) It's much easier to say: They ARE wrong. Why does he sing: "FELT like she left me for another man"? (And then again: She left me ...) Did she or not? I was curious. Now I have an idea of who this gifted man was. I still like to listen to Larry's great music. And yes, it's true: God is building his kingdom with normal humans. Like me and you.


Reply by Alan Cardwell in Belfast @ 15:42 on May 12 2013

typical that people read too much in to everything that Larry said. He was a human and gave up what would have been a lucrative career in secular music.....only for people to question and give their biased points of view

[report abuse]


Posted by Gary Sellars in Humble TX @ 15:12 on Aug 21 2010

It's sad to see such a bitter spirit from those who are claiming bad motives from those in the movie. If you're recommending graciousness, kindness and love, shouldn't you be showing it yourself? But you're not. You're showing the same kind of ugliness for which you're criticizing others.

That doesn't help your credibility.



Posted by Gary Smith in Cardiff @ 15:19 on Jul 25 2010

Mike

Thanks for your article we I appreciated. Like many others I was hugely influenced by Larry Norman's music. I saw him in concert and attended interviews etc.

On my first trip to Nashville I was delighted to see LN there but shocked at his ability to clear a room. Further discussion with friends indicted that they all had stories of unfortunate dealings and relationships with Larry. Indeed my OZ friends, even then knew of his exploits in their country. Obviously I was disappointed but my simple view was he was a man who HAD made some great music. As with many other artists of his age, such as Elton John and Paul McCartney, clearly his best songs (and his case_ performances where behind him. Did the flaws in his character impact my view of his earlier material? No. Why would it?

For his fans to try to defend his character is, I suspect, misplaced. For them to claim that he is vilified because he spoke out against the "system" is naive. I say this for 2 reasons, firstly because he embraced it whilst ever it embraced him. Secondly because others who have questioned its authenticity such as Rich Mullins and Charlie Peacock to name but 2 were always (and still are) celebrated by the industry.

Ultimately, we can never really know about the motivation of those involved in the film or that of LN (as ever enigmatic!). It should neither affect our capacity to appreciate his (at times) genius whilst recognising he was, as we all are, undoubtedly a flawed sinner saved by grace, a propogator of the Gospel and a pedaller, at times of mediocrity.



Posted by Steve L in Vancouver ,BC @ 06:49 on Jul 20 2010

Above all I am disappointed and disillusioned with Randy Stonehill's involvement with this film. Very sad.



The opinions expressed in the Reader Comments are not necessarily those held by Cross Rhythms.

Add your comment

We welcome your opinions but libellous and abusive comments are not allowed.












We are committed to protecting your privacy. By clicking 'Send comment' you consent to Cross Rhythms storing and processing your personal data. For more information about how we care for your data please see our privacy policy.

NAVIGATION
CONNECT WITH CROSS RHYTHMS
SIGNUP

Connect with Cross Rhythms by signing up to our email mailing list

A Step Change...
Cross Rhythms Media Training Centre
MORE ARTICLES
DISCOGRAPHY
ARTIST PROFILES
Artists & DJs A-Z
# A B C D E F G H I J K L M
N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z #
Or keyword search

 

PRAYER ROOMS
Incinerator
Be genuine and real and incinerate your attitudes and apathy in our Prayer Room