Terry Roth was a close friend of Theresa and he sent me the following comments about my letter to IVAC:
let me offer some inputI take it that there has been some decision rendered that this letter addresses- and you wish to reverse that decision.
The letter is very factual except that the tone is very emotional, and may render the reader to detect that it was written with some rage….for instance when you say “….with the assistance of the Surete du Quebec,shows none of these benchmarks of professionalism” you are actually insulting them – and they won’t feel as compelled to help you or even consider what you write if they feel that Words like “snail’s pace” are meant for everyday speech, not a letter to an organization. You could say that it took an inordina
te amount of time or you waited many months, etc… Also when you say “there is no evidence whatsoever that Theresa Allore was at aparty involving drugs. I would like to know exactly what party you are referringto.” I understand what you are saying but it reads like you are shouting at them.
John, you are writing to ask them to reconsider based on some evidence and/or facts that you want them to be made aware of…The tone of anger will turn themoff – not give them the feeling to cooperate….trust me ….there is truth tothe saying “you can get more bees with honey rather than vinegar”Sandy Roth
To which I replied:
Hum… guess you wouldn’t want to see my last email where I told IVAC to go fuck
John, I can well understand your anger in this thing…it has been years
of bungling and back and forth and incompetence and frustration…
I believe however that the anger should be directed to the Surete and
their so-called “investigators”, and not so much these people….
People don’t take kindly to being told that their organization is
incompetent and useless. We know they are but these people have a
different motivation in their lives than you do. They are not guided by
the loss of a sibling and the pain and anguish that comes with not
knowing what happened and worse-yet, that the person responsible is
still out there running around free and unpunished.
Their motivation is driven by positive results to their “clients”. Now
I don’t know what transpired between you and them but judging by a ‘fuck
you’ email you sent, it probebly went the way of the NHL hockey
John, you achieved close to the impossible – you were able to get them
to re-open the case 2 years ago…and since then there has been activity
around that. There have been people involved and correspondence and
interviews and articles….alot more than in the years 1979 to 2002!
You got that by presenting facts and remaining level-headed and
persevering and on the course. Writing this way to an organization in
this way may turn them the other way – viewing you as an angry person
and wanting to distance themselves.
But I understand your position completely – they just may not
My reaction? I know, I may be cutting of my nose off to spite my face. But…
I really do not care if IVAC reverses their decision: what’s hanging in the balance is a mere $600. I DO agree that some battles you don’t fight so agressively. I work for government, and I certainly understand the value of “politique”.
But this is one battle I do not wish to “win”. I don’t need bees. I would rather say what I mean than play games to influence a decision. Terry is completely right, and his words weigh heavy (he was one of my sister’s closest friends); but – despite the destructive nature – I must speak what I feel needs to be said.