Jim Perrin had planned to take over our sister’s house. Within months of their meeting he persuaded her that he should live with her — ‘coerced’ is certainly not too strong when one considers his letter of August 18th 2003, ref. our post Jim Perrin – A Cuckoo in the Nest? — and whilst we know that in the first months she was very much under his influence yet the pressure he exerted was not only intense but dishonourable. She was given little time to think before he put his plan into action; he knew that she was still sharing the house with her long-term partner — they had been there for some sixteen years — but for his plan to succeed he needed to ensure the departure, the ‘eviction’ of this substantial impediment.
Although Jim Perrin’s overwhelming necessity was to ‘disappear’ and to escape the recent attentions of the Child Support Agency there was the additional matter of his precarious personal resources. After juggling his mortgage and (we saw the evidence) several overdrafts, credit cards and loan companies, for him to live in our sister’s house would be the perfect solution to many of these difficulties. Financially speaking he was on very thin ice indeed: never having sufficient funds to pay off Peter after robbing Paul.
He had pressed her (oh, how he had pressed her) to marry him legally — this , we thought at the time, was because he felt he would then have entitlement to her property. Jac used to tell her ‘Welsh’ sister of his latest attempts: of how he repeatedly asked her to marry him saying that he would not believe she loved him if she refused — this was nothing more or less than emotional blackmail — and that his happiness would only be complete if she consented. But she did not want to marry him, agreeing with her sister’s sentiment, (so frequently expressed during their night-time conversations that it had become an on-going joke between them), which was that in this relationship ‘a ring on your finger would be a ring through your nose!’ Instinctively Jac knew this — which is why she refused to countenance the possibility and consistently refused to give in to his blandishments.
* * * * *
When Jim Perrin wrote to our sister shortly after May 1st 2003, it was to express his view that their relationship should be placed on a more public footing: we have acknowledged elsewhere in our posts that our sister became very much in love with him, and she was certainly besotted with him for a while and could not see clearly.
Others in North Wales who knew Jim Perrin, and of his reputation, had warned her of his potential for violence — even telling her that he had viciously attacked a former wife. We now know that it was not gossip, or a slur, but the grim truth and Jac, when she was told of it, was extremely anxious. In the presence of two of her sisters she asked him about the incident and he was obliged, finally and reluctantly — as we were questioning him most earnestly — to admit that ‘to a degree’ the reports were true. But he could explain! We have been told since Jac died though that there were other women whom Jim Perrin has assaulted. It is cowardly to attack a woman. Once would have been a heinous crime, but there have been several such assaults throughout Jim Perrin’s ‘career’. Both physical injuries and extreme psychological damage have been meted out to those over whom he had control: as we have the letters of victims, any denial of our words would be futile. Continue reading
Our sister met Jim Perrin at a reading on the evening of October the 29th, in 2002. Jac had known him nearly three decades earlier — as she explained to us, ‘briefly and intermittently’ — and there had been no contact at all in the intervening years: he was in the past.
At the time of the meeting he was living in Llanrhaeadr ym Mochnant — although he had been there for less than a fortnight — a removal firm had delivered his possessions from his previous address in Ruabon only on the 18th of that month, as the receipt for the payment of their services showed.
However, having met her only on the 29th of October, 2002, and seeing very little of her up to the Christmas of that year he wrote:
‘Over Christmas she was away on a dutiful and extended tour of relations‘.
Away? The implication — and this book is very largely based on implication — being that she was not (‘as usual’?) living with him…
Nor was she! Nor had she been! She was living in her own home celebrating Christmas as she had always done, with her children and family and with her partner of sixteen years. (Ref. our post ‘Jac’s Last Long Relationship’.) Continue reading