In the next section of Jim Perrin’s letter he told Jac of his intention to accept an offer for his house: there was considerable ‘psychology’ concerning their relationship, and many more ‘positive’ thoughts. He then wrote this paragraph:
‘Given that I had absolutely nothing and now have a house full of belongings and considerable equity why should I feel insecure anyway? [This must have been in response to something Jac had said to him.] Particularly since work-wise things are going very well for me, the critical reception for what I do is higher than ever, my craft is coming to fruition.‘ Again he wrote of ‘fixing up a good working environment for [her]’. (The ‘environment’ in which for nearly sixteen years she had created such lovely stained-glass!)
Her studio was known in the family as ‘the cold room’ — it still is to this day — and Jim Perrin, in the time he lived there, did nothing at all to ‘fix it up’. They were merely more of his tempting words. Not that Jac minded, it was her very personal space — one in which she felt contented and secure.
And then, in another lengthy passage, he described his plans for ‘their future’ and his ‘love’ for her: ending, as it were, ‘on a high’. Yet it could not be more apparent how Jim Perrin, throughout this carefully constructed letter, with his ‘mastery’ of persuasion, had so varied his tone to her and — in its main purpose — how he had so coldly, and with such specific calculation, shown his ‘fangs’ as he pressured Jac to ‘get rid’ of her former (and to a degree still current) partner: and we should not for one moment forget how he claimed the influence of the I Ching and how, when he consulted it, it had helped him to reach his important decision: that is, to sell his own house in Llanrhaeadr ym Mochnant and to move to hers. Not, of course, that this decision, as conveniently foretold by the I Ching, had anything to do with the fact that the CSA was hot on his heels…
This infamous letter of August 18th is, we believe, evidence of his attempted control and manipulation of our sister and, we also believe, is ‘evidence’ (as is the outraged ‘anonymous letter’ he wrote, ref. our post of that title) of his real character which generally he is ‘knowing’ and canny enough to keep well-hidden. In the next post we intend to show how, in our opinion, Jim Perrin misrepresented to our sister his financial circumstances.