Jim Perrin has written a particularly noxious ‘anonymous’ letter — one, at least, that we know of — and we have shown it in full transcript with a specimen of his handwriting here.
He was, throughout this letter, twisting facts and dates and trying to put into their landlord’s mind the idea that our late sister’s children were behaving not only anti-socially — with risk to his property — but illegally: doubtless to cause their eviction.
In this remote moorland where there are fewer than a dozen farms the ‘residents’ are mostly known to each other and our sister had lived there with her children for over fifteen years: some of these ‘residents’ were at the party we mention below.
The ‘track’ is on the high moors at the end of a tarmac road which leads only to three other farms before it becomes the length of unsurfaced rough track to the cul-de-sac where our sister’s house is situated.
Jim Perrin’s writing is pure mendacity; he deliberately confuses the date of our sister’s wake which he describes in his book as a ‘party’ — and where there were certainly very many cars, all of which were parked on the ample hard-standing — and the date of her daughter’s birthday party, which he calls a ‘rave’! — and he is implying the possibility of annoyance, even accidents to the ‘residents’: ‘… many cars on our narrow roads.’
‘A rave is being planned.’ Most of us are aware of the mass trespass of some festival-goers — who ‘phone or text each other at the last moment to keep their proposed venue a secret and then arrive in their hundreds, to the consternation of the land-owners; the damage to property which it is said that they irresponsibly cause — the havoc they wreak! — this is the idea that Jim Perrin is planting here.
He suggests that the landlord: ‘…goes along this weekend — the 9th/10th …’ (July). In fact, as the landlord was known to the family, had he done so he would probably have wished our niece ‘Happy Birthday’. Jim Perrin continues: ‘…and you will see for yourself why we are so very anxious at its presence in our community’! ‘…our community is very disturbed by all this…’
‘When Jacquetta and the *Doctor lived there it was fine — now it is chaos’. There are miles between the farms hereabout; Jim Perrin had lived at our sister’s house barely eighteen months — we think there was little chance that he had even met these ‘residents’. His descriptions of ‘our community’ are spurious, and we doubt if anyone who had heard of him knew he was a ‘doctor’. Did he write that, we wonder, to give himself some authority? To, perhaps, impress the landlord?
And the most treacherous: ‘DRUGS BEING CIRCULATED TO LOCAL YOUNG PEOPLE.’ Rich! Considering the self-proclaimed and dedicated drug use of the author — and, of course, another downright lie.
* * * * *
So we come to the reason for this malicious letter (date-stamped 8th July 2005)
Jim Perrin had expected not only to continue living at our sister’s house but to take over the tenancy himself. We have shown elsewhere how he had indicated, quite shamelessly, that it had been Jac’s intention that he should do so, ref. our post Overheard, and his feelings of impotent rage and desire for revenge when his plan was foiled, must surely have been behind this unforgiveable malevolence.
He says, near the end: ‘We [he!] have to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals that have been threatened.’ He was clearly referring to the family and there is not a grain of truth in it. Indeed he had told them of his plans — that he would be going to Connemara to stay with a friend (an ex-lover) and that he would go from there to the French Pyrénées; and the family had every reason to hope and believe that his life would take a turn for the better — as they say — and that he could be happy again. But his claims of ‘fear of reprisals’? — well, he would say that wouldn’t he!
Finally he arrogantly tells the landlord ‘We the residents of [the little area] hope you will take the proper action to bring this under control.’
* * * * *
Luckily the landlord took only a passing interest in the letter, treated it with the disdain that it deserved and passed a copy to the family for their records.
As we have said previously it was sent to the landlord less than eight weeks after our sister’s death; by the man who purported to love her; by the man who has written at length and with sophistry of his ‘love’ for her (‘He is a writer and writers will write’ said Rob MacNeacail). This cowardly letter was sent by the man who has, since her death, capitalised on her memory.
There had been a period of frenzied packing-up and removal of his possessions to storage when he knew he had to leave, and we presume that he had already packed up his computer when he composed this Tour de force; it was, otherwise, breath-taking audacity or the sheer belief in his own omnipotence, that he should have sent this letter — hand-written.
However Jim Perrin may try to slip this leash — to explain the letter away — whatever plausible or accusatory things he may say to repudiate the responsibility for it, we believe, that with all the other content of our blog, we have proved conclusively that he is a liar. This ‘pre-eminent author’ is, in our opinion, a fantasist and a dangerously flawed individual. We believe him to be a cruel and vindictive person who will stop at nothing to achieve his ends. We have shown, beyond any doubt — He has shown in his own words — what sort of person he really is at heart. This quietly spoken man is not a gentle man — nor a gentleman but, we absolutely believe, a truly dishonest and dishonourable man.
Not only so far as our sister Jac is concerned but for all the many others who have told us of their own wretched experiences with Jim Perrin we will continue to try to put the record straight.
* ‘Doctor’ James Ernest ( Actually Ernest James) Perrin?
Honorary Fellowship from Bangor University of Wales (July 2008): PHD/University and date unknown to us?
Later note, 18/07/2016. (And an up-date, 16/06/2018.) After in-depth searching and with the help of many professionals there has been found no record at all of any PhD successfully completed by Jim Perrin: neither has he shown any proof. In our opinion the conclusion must surely be that when on the several occasions he has claimed it he lied.